A/54/PV.9 General Assembly

The Assembly will now hear an address by the President of the Republic of Djibouti.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I have the honour to welcome to the United Nations the President of Djibouti, His Excellency Mr. Ismail Omar Guelleh, and to invite him to address the Assembly. President Guelleh (spoke in French): On the occasion of this historic final session of the General Assembly of the current millennium, which is my first, as I took office in May this year, I extend, on behalf of the people of Djibouti, our sincere best wishes to all the members of the Assembly. I should also like to congratulate you, Sir, on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly at this fifty- fourth session. Your long and extensive experience with the United Nations, beginning as the representative of the South-West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) before your country's independence and continuing as its Permanent Observer, has afforded you a deep insight into the internal workings of the Assembly, and the challenges it now faces. We are convinced that, thanks to your ample skills and commitment, this session of the Assembly will bring a remarkable period to a close on a very positive note. We also wish to express our gratitude to your predecessor, Mr. Didier Opertti of Uruguay, for the exemplary manner in which he conducted the work of the General Assembly. The fact that the Assembly was able to accomplish so much at its fifty-third session was in great measure due to his dedication, skill and intelligent management. We must also acknowledge our great admiration for the tireless efforts of the Secretary-General in continuing his exemplary work under difficult and trying circumstances. On too many fronts the Organization has been facing challenges which jeopardize its proper functioning, whether dealing with issues of peace and conflict, development, or addressing the severe poverty faced by many in the world community. Despite a sharp reduction in the inflow of funds at a time of escalating demands on the Organization, the Secretary-General has succeeded in maintaining a high degree of effectiveness through intelligent rationalization and restructuring. The Organization is therefore continuing to play an important role in world affairs, which is in no small measure attributable to the enlightened leadership of the Secretary- General. As this millennium draws to a close, we find ourselves in a post-cold-war era of globalism. The doctrine that the general pursuit of economic and financial prosperity will necessarily lead to open markets, greater This model calls for the ascendancy of a more efficient private sector and a reduced role for government. For developing countries, the pursuit of maximum economic flexibility has been accompanied by a massive reorganization of legal, social, financial, economic, political and institutional structures — or, as it is known, structural adjustment. The cost of these changes has been considerable, not only in financial terms, but also in human and social terms as well. As the social safety net in many countries consists of government jobs and services, downsizing government has meant considerable suffering, and often with a political price to be paid. Thanks to the spread of technology, particularly in the communications sector, it is now possible for companies and organizations to operate on a global scale and to enter virtually any local market of their choosing. Consequently, economic domination has shifted to the large, transnational corporations and financial conglomerates, which are increasingly the prime movers in most economic systems. Predictably, the poor and unprepared are increasingly isolated and marginalized. It is therefore not surprising that there is a mounting and widespread backlash against the destructive effects of this global juggernaut. The old market economy system following the Second World War — the Marshall Plan era — survived because there were few persistent losers. Everyone got something from the system and could claim ownership. We cannot say that today, for the roster of losers is mounting ominously. This is a distressing omen for the new millennium, made all the more tragic and infuriating because of the abundance of possible remedies. We can make the system work effectively and beneficially if the will is there. But at present the international community lacks determination and a sense of compassion. That does not bode well for mankind. Globalization and the rapid expansion and integration of the international economy have undoubtedly brought immense benefits to many countries and positive changes in the living conditions of many individuals. However, many countries and their populations, particularly in the Clearly, the Horn of Africa has had far more than its share of wars, natural disasters, collapsing States, economic decline and wasted national and human potential. For Djibouti, survival alone has consistently presented an enormous challenge. However, our nation today is stronger and more unified than ever before. We owe this to the wisdom, perseverance and foresight of our first President and father of the nation, my mentor, The Honourable Hassan Gouled Aptidon, who voluntarily retired a few months ago — a praiseworthy decision. He forged a nation and gave it purpose and strength. His enlightened leadership enabled us to remain at peace, while sensitive to our region's difficulties and needs. I am proud to follow in the footsteps of this great soul, and I am determined to safeguard his legacy and our democratic traditions and institutions. Djibouti will continue to work for good governance, democracy and independence, with respect for human rights. We will continue, true to our cultural heritage, to give sanctuary to people displaced by conflicts in our region, despite the severe strain this puts on our meagre resources. Africa has many hopeful spots, but there remain a number of disturbing conflicts involving nations, countless rebel and separatist movements and factions. Democratic elections took place a few months ago in two major States of sub-Saharan Africa — Nigeria and South Africa — and in smaller ones, such as Djibouti, while in most of the major conflicts ravaging the continent ceasefires or peace processes are under way. In looking over these developments, what can we reasonably expect? What must we strive to bring about? Our first priority must be to bring conflict and destruction to an end. That is why ceasefires, the withdrawal of combatants, disarmament, the settlement of conflicts, and the resettlement of displaced persons are important priorities for Africa. As conflicts rage in the heart of the continent, a dangerous new tendency has begun to appear. Conflicts are no longer localized or fought between two clear adversaries, but attract a growing legion of participants We are therefore relieved that the brutal conflict in Sierra Leone is at last resolved. Besides Somalia, perhaps the most worrying conflict now is Angola, where again outside actors appear to be playing significant roles. We therefore naturally support the call of the Secretary-General, who in his report on conflict in Africa called for a reversal of the international community's great reluctance in recent years to assume the political and financial responsibilities associated with deploying peacekeeping operations. We must also do everything we can to augment the United Nations capacity in humanitarian assistance, as well as in post-conflict peace-building. None of this, though, should absolve Africa of the need to come together to strengthen its own crisis response and peacekeeping capability, through the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and subregional organizations. Last year, in his address to this Assembly, my predecessor noted the sudden and surprising outbreak of massive hostilities between our neighbours, Ethiopia and Eritrea. This has been the cause of much anguish, apprehension and instability in the Horn of Africa. The loss of life on both sides is among the greatest ever witnessed between African States. Persistent efforts by the OAU and various countries, including Djibouti, have proved to be in vain. Ethiopia is presently seeking further clarification on the “technical arrangements” proposed by the OAU, and we hope that the ongoing efforts will produce the desired breakthrough. If a ceasefire does not take effect and agreement is not reached, the destruction and further loss of life will once again be deplorable. Years will be needed to repair the damage done to ethnic tolerance and trust in the Horn of Africa. We therefore support the OAU, which is demonstrating its tenacity and foresight in trying to bring about a lasting resolution of this crisis. Clearly, Eritrea needs to be a good neighbour to all its neighbours. Djibouti is now facing a relentless threat of destabilization through incursions and landmines, as well as the training and arming of disaffected elements. Rather than being confined to Ethiopia, hostilities have spread to practically every country in the Horn. We sincerely believe that Eritrea would gain more as an equal partner in the collective regional efforts to fashion a comprehensive The renewed dialogue between the Palestinians and the new Israeli leader appears to offer a promising opportunity for charting a new course in the Middle East. The most urgent need is to restore confidence — a task that will involve winning over the hearts and minds of Palestinians jaded by the cynicism of successive Israeli Governments. The timely implementation of the provisions of the recent agreement should help build the necessary confidence by making the parties see reason. Advantage must be taken of the current momentum, despite the efforts of hostile factions. Now that a time-table has been set for the consideration of final-status issues such as borders, settlements, the status of Jerusalem, refugees, water and statehood for Palestine, the outcome will depend on the will and commitment of both sides. The road should also be cleared for a settlement of the Golan Heights question and for the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, in accordance with Security Council resolution 425 (1978). The crippling sanctions imposed on Iraq almost a decade ago have taken a heavy toll on the population, particularly on the elderly, women and children. We urge the international community to undertake a realistic review of these sanctions with a view to lifting them altogether. The Arab world and the world as a whole have recently lost several remarkable and pragmatic leaders. King Hussein of Jordan, the Amir of Bahrain and King Hassan II of Morocco are no longer with us. Although we all feel a sense of loss at their premature demise, we have every confidence their legacies will live on. Mr. President, I beg your indulgence, as I would now like to speak at length about the tragedy in Somalia. For nearly a decade now we have been witnessing the inexorable disintegration of Somalia. With their country racked by violence and lacking a government, the Somali people are being denied their basic human rights. It is imperative that every effort be made to alleviate the suffering of the millions of Somalis who have been living a precarious existence for a decade now. Housing and water are alarmingly scarce. Rampant lawlessness prevails, the country is at a political impasse, and its future is bleak. If no concrete steps are taken, the result This unique situation, I would even say this tragedy, ought to be given priority — the kind of serious consideration that is given to other tragedies. We strongly believe that international and regional stability depend to a large extent on the domestic stability of all of the States Members of this Organization. It is tragic indeed that the international community is unwilling to acknowledge this reality, simply because, it seems, it has no vital national interests at stake there. So the warlords are left to fight it out until a victor emerges and a degree of order is restored. Political will on the part of the international community can bring peace to Somalia, too. Because of pervasive indifference and a lack of resolve, vision and action on our part, Somalia is crumbling. It is no longer a politically viable entity. Indeed, the continued anarchy in that country is indicative of the failure of global governance to serve poor countries in the developing world. The Somali people know that only too well. A decade of violence, hunger, disease and uncertainty has given rise to unparalleled levels of despair. All Somalis, it is safe to say, are living below the poverty line, and the devastating civil war shows no signs of abating in most parts of the country. Somalia could easily become a magnet for criminal elements, drug traffickers and terrorists as well as a dumping ground of dangerous toxic wastes. Overfishing by foreigners of Somalia's unprotected waters is also a cause of great concern to us. The latest comprehensive report of the Secretary- General on Somalia accurately notes that the country has degenerated into a black hole of anarchy, with no national government or attributes of statehood. The principal victims of this senseless conflict are an entire generation of Somali children, who are being denied access to education. The United Nations intervened in Somalia in 1992 with all the right intentions: to restore peace, stability, and law and order. In this respect, it was entrusted with assisting the Somali people in rebuilding their economy and their social and political life; restoring their institutional structures; achieving national political reconciliation; and recreating a Somali state based on democratic governance. Regrettably, those laudable intentions came to naught following the termination of the United Nations Operation in Somalia, due to the lack of cooperation from the Somali factions over security issues, and despite the exceptional Since the end of the United Nations operation, two conferences have given rise to a certain optimism — the Ethiopian-sponsored Sodere conference and the Cairo conference, sponsored by the Egyptian Government. However, both conferences succeeded only in highlighting the divisions among the warlords on the one hand and the interested countries on the other. Several countries and organizations have worked tirelessly to restore some measure of governance in Somalia. The focus, though, has always remained on bringing together the feuding warlords in order to assist them in reaching an agreement that would end the stalemate. But seeking a lasting settlement through the warlords, as has repeatedly and unambiguously been demonstrated throughout the conflict, has proved to be wishful thinking; uncertainty reigns, and the culture of impunity persists. Lately, we have seen the formation of all sorts of political and military alliances across factional lines in a bid to pacify the country, but such initiatives are often greeted with scepticism or even criticism by other factions and even by certain countries. Clearly, not a single factional leader can claim national support or acceptance, because Somali civil society has grown cynical about a political game devoid of sincerity, vision and substance. Everybody agrees in recognizing that the warlords can offer nothing that would lead us to believe that they will ever agree on a lasting settlement, much less the implementation of conclusions agreed between them. The people are tired of false rhetoric and deception, as they become poorer and their future becomes bleaker every day. Even beyond Somalia, the warlords pose a potential threat. They need to be resisted, for there is the very real problem of a “contagion” effect, whereby chronic instability in one country in the Horn might prove to be a real threat to its neighbours, if it is not contained or eliminated within a reasonable period of time. Liberia’s seven-year war, with its child soldiers and unspeakable atrocities against civilians, helped set a tragic pattern that was repeated in Sierra Leone. Obviously, already inundated with weapons, Somalia hardly needs external involvement by way of arms supplies or proxy confrontations, but that is precisely what is now taking place in that country. For all of us, this situation only increases our worry about Somalia’s future. The Somalis, too, have human rights; they have the same right as others to be protected from oppressive, malicious and power-hungry individuals who continually and freely move from one capital to another, raising funds and securing armaments. Although these individuals are responsible for the destruction of their country, for the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians, countless numbers of casualties and for the paralysis that immobilizes the country to this day, the international community did not intervene in Somalia, “to defend humanitarian principles and to stand up for the values of civilization and justice”, as one Western leader stated in justifying the Kosovo operation. The United Nations Operation in Somalia was also saddled with ambiguities in its mandate and there was never an intention to rid the country of the warlords. Furthermore, Kosovo represents a clear case of determined and vigorous action to achieve a specific objective — to drive the marauding Serb army from Kosovo. Furthermore, the United Nations operation in Kosovo is vested with unprecedented power, because the circumstances warrant the exercise of nearly sovereign powers. It has authority over the territory, the people of Kosovo, the legislative and the executive powers of Kosovo, including the administration of the judiciary system. That mandate is a far cry from that in Somalia; but then Somalia is not Kosovo. We all agree that the current level of fragmentation cannot be allowed to continue. Many ideas have been floated in the past, but none of these will succeed or even survive as long as the warlords have the luxury of determining the fate of Somalia. Indeed, they continue to exercise a veto over the restoration of peace and national authority. The question remains, for how many more years Liberia was reconstituted through strong international efforts. Warlords of varying levels of power and support eventually submitted to international pressures and accepted independent, internationally supervised democratic elections, followed by the implementation of agreements during a year of transition carried out under the leadership of an individual — in fact, a woman — not affiliated with any of the warlords. The elections were described as “free and fair”, and Liberians were thus able to bid farewell at last to a destructive and intractable conflict. This was indeed an exemplary process in which the Economic Community of West African States, supported by the United Nations, played a leading role. Since the outbreak of the Somali crisis some 10 years ago, the United Nations, the Organization of African Unity, the League of Arab States, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development and our subregional organization, as well as many countries, both within and outside the region, have tried to salvage that nation from mayhem, anarchy and political paralysis through all kinds of conferences, meetings and contacts with and among the warlords. Sadly, however, the warlords have repeatedly demonstrated their unwillingness to heed the international community’s call to put the good of the country above their individual lust for power and control. We have to ask ourselves, as leaders of the world assembled here, what should be done about Somalia. The time has come, in our view, for the international community to take a decision to break the long silence on this forgotten conflict by supporting bold, decisive measures against the warlords. That is why, after deep reflection and after taking into account all relevant factors, I felt compelled to set out before the Assembly today a series of proposals and phased measures that would be the expression of our outrage, frustration and impatience with the status quo perpetuated by the warlords. The first phase has to do with the fact that the warlords, as I have described with great sorrow, have failed on every count during this long, intractable civil war. Thus, I am loath to support yet another conference held for these men who have completely lost the The Somali people has matured politically during these years of suffering and knows what it needs: economic prosperity and social progress in a context of democracy, liberty and peace. In line with the wishes of the Somali people, Djibouti is embarking upon measures intended; to enhance and strengthen Somali’s confidence in themselves, in each other and in their common destiny; to make a real contract of trust and progress between the actors of economic, social, cultural and intellectual life; and to implement with determination, serenity and equity the work of rehabilitation, political, economic and administrative normalization and the promotion of the culture of dialogue between the Somali people in order to create a lasting environment of dialogue for the emergence of a new generation of decision makers. In order for Djibouti to have confidence in the Somali people’s responsibility for its future, Somali citizens must finally be given the right to speak out so that they can restore the essential values of liberty, truth, justice, responsibility and transparency. By working for and basing themselves on Somali civil society through the holding of a genuine reconciliation conference, the representatives of the Somali people, including the warlords, will be committing themselves to the path of peace and national reconciliation. We seek a Somalia led and governed by the best people drawn from all generations, in particular people who inspire confidence because of their commitment to law, justice, freedom and peace; those who will govern with a view to fulfilling a mandate that can be withdrawn at any time in accordance with the requirements of the common good; those who do not think only of profiting by the misfortune of their brethren to gain a scrap of power no matter what the cost to the Somali nation. Somalia needs those men and women who in spite of everything have retained their ethical values, the force of their personalities and their intellectual and spiritual dynamism: free men and women who are ready to offer their fellow Somalis a credible way out of their tragedy that will be consistent with the cultural heritage and collective memory of the Somali people. The reconciliation conference must give rise to agreement and commitment by all Somalis to the following Here I should say that some countries in or outside of the Horn of Africa, which in one way or another are fueling the conflict in Somalia, must reconsider their positions. These countries are pursuing narrow national interests by supporting the profusion of warlords in various ways, and they are only prolonging the agony and privation of Somali civil society. I call on all actors in the civil war to review their priorities with a view to achieving peace in Somalia. It is time that they controlled themselves: high time. When they can agree that the warlords fully support or accept the parameters of phase one, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), the United Nations and the countries of the region must work together to help Somalia in its transition to democracy. As in Guinea- Bissau, the United Nations should establish a post-conflict peace-building office in Somalia to initiate projects in support of this process, including by coordinating and monitoring the holding of legislative and presidential elections. I turn now to phase two. If the warlords place insurmountable obstacles on the road to peace, the international community will have to shoulder its responsibility and demonstrate robustly that it cannot let the persecution of Somali civilians continue indefinitely without taking action. The warlords must in that case be prosecuted for crimes against humanity: for abuse of power, especially through the unjustified persecution of civilians; for flagrant violations of human rights; and for having caused the collapse of the State and the destruction of their country. With their unabated violence and their erratic behaviour, the warlords have stolen the childhood from Somalia’s young people; they have Moreover, harsh and targeted punishment must be meted out to warlords who do not agree to the international community’s demand that peace and a framework for governance be restored in Somalia: they must be confined to their bleak and battered areas; they must be banned from freely traveling abroad to further their sinister designs; all foreign support and all assistance, whether monetary or material, must be banned; and all their assets, in all forms and wherever they are located, must be frozen. Turning to phase three, if the measures set out in the first two phases cannot achieve the objectives because of obstruction by the warlords, we would be faced with two difficult choices: We could continue to remain indifferent and to do nothing about the decade-old siege of Somalia; or organizations to which Somalia belongs, first and foremost the Organization of African Unity and the League of Arab States, with support from the United Nations and from other countries, could decide that they were obliged to resolve the situation by using all necessary means on the principle that no State — or criminal warlord in this case — may continue indefinitely to commit flagrant violations of human rights and to hold a country hostage forever. Those are the critical scenarios we need to discuss, because, however much one might wish to forget Somalia, it will not just go away. We must do something to remedy the situation, and we must do it as quickly as possible. Let me reiterate that we must put an end to the complacency we have displayed towards the warlords, and that Somali civil society must be more closely involved in any future process. It is important to note that the situation is not the same in all regions of the country; anarchy does not prevail everywhere. Somalia has many contrasting faces depending on the region. While disorder reigns in areas of the centre and the South, northern regions such as the self-proclaimed states of Somaliland and Puntland are enjoying relative peace and stability. Those two areas fortunately escaped most of the conflict that ravaged the country in the 1990s. They have made a great effort to strengthen security and, with very little outside assistance, have carried out admittedly limited economic reconstruction programmes. The international community has thus far been wary of providing meaningful assistance, on the pretext that the political and security situation makes it impossible. I am grateful to the Secretary-General, who has placed the question of Somalia high on the international agenda, and to United Nations agencies such as the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Children’s Fund, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the World Food Programme and their partners, who have provided food and care to the Somali people despite the risks for the safety of their personnel. But these praiseworthy efforts seem to be showing some fatigue, even frustration, because of inadequate support from donors, as reflected in the lukewarm response to the 1999 United Nations appeal. We urge the international community to continue to help the Somali people during these times, which are particularly difficult due in part to the long drought, further exacerbated by the ongoing civil war.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the Republic of Djibouti for the statement he has just made.

The Assembly will now hear an address by the President of the Republic of Costa Rica.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I have the honour to welcome to the United Nations the President of the Republic of Costa Rica, His Excellency President Rodríguez Echeverría (spoke in Spanish): Let me congratulate you, Sir, on your election to the presidency of this General Assembly, a truly global parliament where all mankind is represented and finds expression in its diversity and its fundamental unity. Your election and your personal qualities honour your country and your region. I would like to congratulate also the delegations of Kiribati, Tonga and Nauru, and through them their Governments and peoples, on their recently becoming Members of this Organization. We are convinced that they will contribute constructively and positively to the work of the United Nations, and that their presence here reaffirms the universal and democratic vocation of the General Assembly. We are holding this session at a transcendental moment in human history. At the threshold of a new century and a new millennium, it is timely for the peoples of the world to reflect on the future of our countries and of the international system. Facing the new millennium, we must draw lessons from the era that we are leaving behind, in which we learned all the good and all the evil that we can do. We saw the first man walking on the moon, the end of apartheid in South Africa and peace agreements signed in Central America; but we witnessed also the consequences of the nuclear mushroom cloud and the aberration of the Holocaust, ethnic conflicts and local wars which in the last 40 years have caused more deaths than the two world wars together. We have seen the bright-lights of democracy and freedom, but also the deep shadows of poverty and the violation of human rights. This has been a century of great contrasts. While in some parts of the globe peace is signed, in others war is never ending. While thousands of millions live in poverty, a small group lives in opulence. While we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in many parts of the world gross violations of human dignity are committed. Yes, this has been a century of many contrasts. It has given us plenty of reasons to be proud, but it has also made us ashamed of the cruelty and hardness of the human heart. For these reasons we should never forget the lessons of the twentieth century. In the context of these lessons, we, the 188 nations gathered here — each with its own flag and symbols, each with its own political, commercial and strategic interests, each with its own problems, suffering, visions and For these reasons, we have to recognize that the greatest failure of the United Nations and the international community in recent years has been the persistence of cruel armed conflicts and civil wars, which cause continued humanitarian crises and prevent the peaceful development of nations. The real victims of war are the displaced and refugee children and elderly, the raped women, the youngsters killed, the workers whose workplaces are destroyed, the students whose schools are bombed and the sick who cannot receive treatment. While war persists, human rights cannot be respected. In this sense, we condemn the atrocities committed in East Timor against the civilian population, and we join the whole world in demanding that its will, democratically expressed, be respected. We view with satisfaction the quick action of the Security Council, which will allow for the deployment of an international peacekeeping force in that Territory in order to prevent a greater humanitarian crisis. In retrospect, this crisis teaches us that the international community must be willing to actively and promptly support the processes that it initiates. Regarding the situation in the Middle East, we watch with hope the progress in the search for a peaceful and definitive solution on the basis of full compliance with the Oslo accords. We acknowledge the tireless efforts of President Barak, of Israel, and President Arafat, of the Palestinian Authority, and their commitment to peace and the future of their peoples. I would like to express my condolences to the people of the Republic of China on Taiwan for the tragic earthquake that devastated its territory on Monday, 20 September, and the recent after-shock. My most heartfelt sympathy goes to the families of the victims and the injured. Costa Rica has a firm relationship with the Republic of China on Taiwan. We admire its shared economic progress, its respect for human rights and its democracy, much promoted by President Lee. Our deep commitment to the cause of peace prompts us to view with concern the growing differences and instability in the region during the last year. We fear that these threaten peace and might unleash a new armaments race. For this reason, we trust that the differences will be resolved through constructive We must remember that the United Nations was established with precisely the mandate of eradicating the scourge of war, and it must again take the lead in the maintenance of international peace and security. Costa Rica therefore supports the efforts to reform the Security Council, which cannot be limited simply to an increase in the number of its members, even if this might be useful. Rather, the reform effort must centre on the Council’s revitalization. Fifty years ago Costa Rica abolished its army. In line with this example, it has advocated disarmament throughout the history of the United Nations, in order to build a world of progress and peace. The abolition of the army allowed our society to become an example of dialogue, respect and the peaceful coexistence of all social groups. Costa Rica actively promotes demilitarization because it knows its extraordinary benefits for human development; in this context, we have proposed the creation of a fund for the demilitarization of Central America, as well as the strengthening of, and full compliance with, the mechanisms of international law, in order to guarantee international peace and security and respect for human rights throughout the world. Costa Rica considers that humanitarian crises are in themselves threats to international peace and security. When they arise, the United Nations and the Security Council must not attempt to avoid their responsibility, whatever reasons are invoked. Nowadays any massive violation of human rights, any humanitarian emergency, requires the coordinated action of the international community, through this Organization. For there to be justice at the global level, the rule of law and full compliance with the principles that gave birth to the United Nations must prevail. In this context, we recall the importance of the prompt establishment of the International Criminal Court, and thus call on all States that have not yet done so to sign the Statute with a view to its prompt ratification, and we reiterate the need to accelerate the negotiations on its rules of procedure. Costa Rica hopes to receive promptly the final text in order to proceed to its ratification. Furthermore, we must recognize that conflicts and crises are multifaceted and that they present a series of political, military and economic problems. In this context, action undertaken by the United Nations must be designed not only to re-establish peace in military terms but also to My people’s manifest desire is for the new century to be truly the century of human rights and human development. I would like to express to the international community the desire of a people that, since the nineteenth century, has been building the foundation of a far-sighted society by balancing in a single equation respect for human rights, freedom, peace, active tolerance, fraternity, democracy and solidarity. The end of the cold war, the knowledge-based economy, awareness of gender issues, an understanding of the rights of the persons with disabilities and of minorities, respect for the rights of the future generations and for environmental protection, and the processes of globalization have all begun to delineate a new human order: a twenty-first century with a more human mankind. In this new context, which is just now showing its initial characteristics, the human development agenda and the human rights agenda must coincide and complement each other. The twenty-first century is taking shape as that in which individuals and peoples will demand the right to human development, which is nothing more than the appropriate implementation and effectiveness of the institutions of freedom: human rights, the rule of law, pluralism, competition, solidarity and harmony with nature. It is at once a right and a duty to take part, actively, creatively and jointly, in the creation of such development, because the twenty-first century is called upon to be the century of high-intensity citizenship. Male and female citizens are, together with the State and the international community, the creators of their own opportunities and the builders of their own development. Passivity is a thing of the past. We in Costa Rica who are part of this change greatly value the foresight and sense of responsibility of our forefathers, which have made of our small motherland the second-ranking country in Latin America in terms of human development and the oldest and most stable democracy in the region. Even as early as the end of the nineteenth century, Costa Ricans enjoyed the continent’s highest levels of education and health, thanks to the Faithful to its humanitarian tradition, Costa Rica implemented the most generous immigration policy put forward by any nation in recent years, giving hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants from the region — amounting to more than 10 per cent of our population — the opportunity to normalize their situation with a minimum of requirements, as well as the opportunity to enjoy full equality with our nationals in access to our social welfare institutions. We hope that other countries that are sought out by immigrants because of war, poverty, natural catastrophes and ethnic conflicts will follow this example. Our country is making great efforts to look after these hundreds of thousands of immigrants; therefore, we reiterate our need to be helped so that we can strengthen the health, education and basic-services systems that we use in order to meet their needs. At this end of the century, it has been my task to promote vital transformations for the future of our small nation. We are protecting human beings even before they are born. We are fighting against child labour and the sexual exploitation of minors. We are opening havens for our adolescent mothers, and we are fighting the aggression suffered by women in many homes the world over. We are strengthening the family, providing it with more and better opportunities. We are working in favour of the rights of elder adults and those of workers, in order to deepen our social achievements of the 1940s and to guarantee a retirement pension in old age as a universal human right. Costa Rica is today acknowledged to be the healthiest society in Latin America, with high levels of computer literacy. It is the oldest democracy on the continent and a leader in the conservation and protection of the environment. Its human development levels are comparable to those of developed countries. Nevertheless, we face serious problems that prevent us from indulging in misguided self-congratulation. The awarding of the Nobel Prize to Amartya Sen for his work on the welfare economy and on the understanding of poverty, inequality and hunger reminds us that global development must include the fight against inequalities and extreme poverty. This, however, must not be a struggle in which developed countries take part only out of a feeling of human solidarity; rather, it must be a struggle that involves the entire system of nations through the creation of appropriate instruments and mechanisms for action that offer opportunities for development through trade and investment. We welcomed the views of Harvard University economist Jeffrey Sachs — published recently in The Economist and supported yesterday by President Clinton and today by Vice-Chancellor Fischer of Germany — regarding the urgent need to establish new mechanisms to ensure the necessary resources for the purchase of medicines and vaccines to combat tropical diseases, thus securing their development and ensuring their distribution to the poorest and most helpless sectors of mankind. Costa Rica has spoken out to have the international economic order allow the development of those countries that are lagging behind. If we do not take action in this direction, the conditions necessary for the long-term maintenance of international peace and security will not be created. We have constantly advocated a more just and equitable economic and commercial order, one that will provide all nations with access to the benefits of the globalization process and that will provide small developing States with better opportunities to enter into commercial agreements. Before the European Union we have also advocated secure and tariff-free access for Latin American agricultural products to the European Union markets, whose protectionism costs Latin America $4.223 billion dollars annually. In order to promote the development of small States, it is indispensable to establish open trade systems so that trade and investment can become engines of economic growth and so that more and better opportunities for employment will be created in a region that suffers poverty and unemployment. On the other hand, the nations gathered here face the challenge of building an international financial system that will protect small States from economic crises. Small economies do not cause the crises, but we do suffer their adverse effects and we have not received the necessary support to face them. To correct this situation, Costa Rica proposes the creation of a precautionary fund with a flexible and speedy financial mechanism to solve the financial emergencies of small and vulnerable States, which are frequently forgotten by the international financial community because of their limited global impact. As a country that has succeeded in building a culture of protecting and preserving the environment, we stress, as we did at the summit between Europe and Latin America held this year in Rio de Janeiro, the urgent need to build an international system that will reward those who protect the environment and penalize those who contaminate or destroy it. Currently, my country is developing a system of payments to the owners of forests for environmental services and more than one fourth of our territory is protected in reservations or national parks. Costa Rica reiterates the need to take action to better apply the Kyoto Protocol; to make greater use of new markets; and to determine efficiently the costs of pollution and the profits of preservation in order to maintain the sustainable use of natural resources. Jointly with Norway, we performed the first global transaction of certificates of greenhouse-gases reduction. This mechanism should receive the support of all countries, not only in order to apply the right to human and sustainable development in each country, but also to extend the life of the human species on our planet. Let us recall that, in this task, the obligations are shared but differentiated. It is time to move from words to deeds. It is clear that, if financial systems of broader coverage are not established; if more open trade schemes are not implemented; if protectionism by developed countries, which limits our access to their markets, is not reduced; and if the global benefits of our forests are not recognized, developing countries will see a decline in their opportunities for economic growth; inequalities will increase; poverty will further deepen; political stability and Wanting the developed countries to recognize the right to human development of small countries is not utopian. It is the real aspiration of those peoples that have faced with meagre resources the tragedies of wars and the wrath of nature. Solidarity and fraternity among nations must be genuine. The twenty-first century awaits us. Let us all join hands. Humankind must enter this new age united. The twenty-first century must be the century of human rights — the century of human development.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the Republic of Costa Rica for the statement he has just made.

The Assembly will now hear an address by the President of the Republic of Suriname.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I have the honour to welcome to the United Nations the President of the Republic of Suriname, His Excellency Mr. Jules Albert Wijdenbosch, and to invite him to address the Assembly. President Wijdenbosch: First of all, I would like to extend to you, Sir, my warm congratulations on your election to the helm of our General Assembly at its fifty- fourth session. We are confident that, in view of your long experience in the affairs of our Organization, we may look forward to a fruitful and constructive year for the work of the General Assembly and its Main Committees. Allow me also to thank Mr. Didier Opertti, who led the General Assembly at its fifty-third session with remarkable distinction and efficiency. Furthermore, I would like to join previous speakers in welcoming the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga as new Members of the United Nations family. The ongoing globalization process has increased the influence of markets, benefiting a small group of countries, their corporations and people. At the same time, it has marginalized the majority of developing nations, in particular the small and vulnerable ones, undermining decades-long efforts by these countries to create economic well-being, social justice and sustainable human development. It has, furthermore, eroded trade preferences and challenged and undermined the basic principles of international cooperation. It has also eroded international commitments to financing for development through the non- fulfilment of agreed targets of official development assistance and through the reduction in contributions to the core resources of the different programmes and funds of the United Nations system. The drop in prices of primary commodities to their lowest level in a century and a half and the reduction of official development assistance have brought many Governments in developing countries face to face with the dangers of not being in a position to address in a satisfactory manner the just socio-economic demands of their respective peoples. In many cases, this has triggered social unrest and political instability and hampered efforts to achieve sustainable development. Access to financing for development has been rendered more difficult, since the flow of private capital resources has been limited to certain regions and to a few developing countries, resulting in a further widening of the gap between developed and the majority of developing countries. As a consequence of this widening gap, poverty continues to rise, leading to increased migration, environmental deterioration, political conflicts and instability, which eventually will have long-term negative consequences not only for developing, but for developed countries as well. The international community therefore has a moral obligation to ensure that these negative influences of The traffic in illegal drugs has become a serious threat to the national security of many nations, in particular the small and vulnerable ones such as Suriname, because it promotes violence, corruption, money-laundering and illegal arms trafficking. In this way, countries can be manoeuvred into dangerous waters and be accused of interference in the internal affairs of others. It has become practically impossible for Suriname, with its limited resources, to combat this scourge on its own. We are therefore actively pursuing bilateral agreements with friendly nations to assist us in this difficult task. In this context, I would mention the agreement on cooperation in maritime law enforcement which we recently signed with the Government of the United States of America. We will continue to work closely with our neighbours, with friendly nations and with the relevant regional and international institutions to contribute to the ongoing fight to eradicate this evil from our region. The information superhighway, the Internet, is nowadays the means of choice for the exchange of information, with a great impact on the social and economic life of the international community. This new form of technology offers great possibilities for accelerated development in many fields. At the same time, however, we should note that the development of this technology involves the risk of further marginalizing vulnerable economies. In addition to the positive effects of the Internet, we see that the adverse effects on trade, the ever widening gap in the field of education, the threat to social and cultural values and the abuse of this technology by people with malicious intentions often cause great concern in third world societies. I am convinced that in applying innovative technology, equal attention should be given to the negative effects for societies with limited or no access to it. I therefore urge the United Nations to ensure that this disparity, with its far-reaching consequences in the socio-economic, educational and cultural fields, is The Surinamese Government is of the opinion that its foreign policy must be fully at the service of its social and economic development. In our view, the State should no longer fulfil the role it has traditionally performed of bearing full responsibility for development strategies and acting as a dirigiste and sometimes even as a welfare State: development requires a State which is effective, fulfils the role of catalyst and facilitator, and encourages and complements the activities of the private sector. Good governance is not a luxury, but an absolute necessity. In addition, I should say that without an effectively operating State it would be impossible, from both the economic and the social points of view, to implement a policy for sustainable development. For development does not presuppose that there will be only the appropriate economic, social and technical inputs: in today's world, sustainable development and welfare can be attained only if regulations in a country are supportive so that the State can contribute to the effectiveness of the intended development. It is my Government's objective to develop our natural resources in cooperation with identified partners in the international community in such a manner that the environment and the ecosystem will be preserved for future generations. In this light, may the unique decision by Suriname to offer almost 10 per cent of its territory as a gift to humankind by creating a nature reserve of nearly 1.16 million hectares, serve as an example. The environment and its biodiversity shall, especially in this nature reserve, always be fully protected. The Government of Suriname is convinced that effective democratic structures are fundamental to a satisfactory enjoyment of democracy, so conditions have been created for the fullest development of Suriname's citizens. Since the beginning of its period of administration, the Government has devoted itself to strengthening democratic institutions and anchoring the rule of law. Law and justice, and effective institutions to implement them, are the basis for the comprehensive and balanced development of the nation. My Government's policy is aimed also at promoting and safeguarding fundamental human rights and freedoms. Thus, we are creating ideal conditions for the optimal On 25 May 2000, the Surinamese people will decide, through general and free elections by secret ballot, on the appointment of a national Government at the highest level of State. My Government and the independent institutions designated by law are engaged in preparations for the approaching elections. In this respect, we know we have the support of the Organization of American States and the United Nations, as well as other international organizations. Talks on possible financial assistance by the European Union are in a phase of conclusion. The primary goal of the Government is to hold general and free elections, with the greatest possible care, by secret ballot, and once again to confirm to the world Suriname's excellent reputation in this field. Our world is closing this millennium, in which humankind has made enormous progress in science and technology, enhancing its capacity for its own security and survival. The millennium has been an era of untold human suffering caused by wars waged between and within States, with the means capable of destroying all that which the human race has so far achieved. It has also been an era in which many developing countries gained constitutional independence. Unfortunately, however, it has not brought them economic independence and hence actual decolonization. Consequently, their full participation in developments relating to the formation of economic blocs was seriously impeded. This millennium has also seen the birth of a unique world Organization, the United Nations, to assist us in overcoming the threat of complete destruction. Let us allow this unique instrument to assist humanity in achieving its noble desire for a peaceful world — a world with equitable economic, trade and development systems; a world with a protected and safe environment and ecosystem; a world in which human rights and fundamental freedoms are protected, promoted and guaranteed to all its citizens; a world with adequate development opportunities for everyone; a world in which human potential can be fully developed, irrespective of race, sex, creed or religion; and a world from which all tendencies and signals regarding recolonization originating from former colonizers are banished.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the Republic of Suriname for the statement he has just made.

The Assembly will now hear an address by the President of the Federated States of Micronesia.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I have the honour to welcome to the United Nations the President of the Federated States of Micronesia, His Excellency Mr. Leo A. Falcam, and to invite him to address the Assembly. President Falcam: I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you, Mr. Gurirab, on your assumption of the office of President of this body. My Government hails the selection of a distinguished leader from a new developing nation to lead the General Assembly into the new millennium. We are also confident that you will live up to the high standards of your esteemed predecessor, Mr. Opertti. It is with pride that I congratulate and extend a welcome to our Pacific island neighbours — the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of Nauru and the great Kingdom of Tonga — on their admission into the United Nations family. This represents a large contribution from our region to the attainment of a key goal of the United Nations system, that of universality. I want to extend the sincere condolences of the people of the Federated States of Micronesia for the earthquakes in Turkey, Greece and, more recently, in Taiwan. We are saddened by the violence in East Timor as its people seek to exercise their right to self-determination. Condolences are also in order on the recent death of His Majesty Hassan II of Morocco. His strong personal contributions to the process of achieving peace in the Middle East will be remembered. As Chairman of the South Pacific Forum, I am privileged to deliver the following remarks on behalf of its 16 member countries. The South Pacific Forum is a unique organization centred on the Heads of Government of 16 Pacific nations which share a very special part of the world: the vast expanses of ocean and islands in the central and western Pacific, both north and south of the Equator. Forum member countries vary greatly in land area, ocean area, population, resource endowment, economic development, social structures, language and culture. However, we all share a common bond as Forum members and have established consensus positions, which transcend our diversity, on a wide range of issues. We have also agreed to work together in pursuit of regional stability and towards the well-being of our people. Fourteen of these Forum members are small island developing States. Much work has been done to assist these smaller members in their pursuit of sustainable development. Such initiatives are reflected in proposals by the Forum’s Ministers of economics, for extensive economic reforms. Recently, Forum trade Ministers made ground-breaking recommendations on trade initiatives which include the establishment of a Pacific free trade area consistent with the rules and standards of the World Trade Organization. These recommendations will be considered by the Forum heads of Government at their annual meeting in Palau next month. Past practice has been for the formal statement from each annual meeting, known as the Forum Communiqué, to be offered for inclusion as a document of the General Assembly. As the meeting this year will take place after the conclusion of the general debate, a request for inclusion of the Forum Communiqué from the Palau meeting will be made at a later date. Last year, at their meeting in Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia, all 16 Forum leaders reaffirmed their endorsement of the Barbados Programme of Action In this regard, Forum leaders strongly supported the General Assembly initiative to hold, next week, the special session to review progress under the Barbados Programme of Action. Forum countries have maintained close involvement with the preparatory process for the special session, and appreciate the strong focus on the concerns of small island developing States in the work of United Nations bodies such as the Commission on Sustainable Development. We look forward to outcomes from the special session that will bring a new and stronger focus on our needs in the pursuit of sustainable development, and step up the pace of measures to implement the Barbados Programme of Action. The common need for accelerated and sustainable economic development remains a major focus among the Forum member countries; in fact, the Forum itself has for some time been implementing what is known as the Forum Economic Action Plan. The Plan attempts to address regional concerns, which are echoed in the Barbados Programme of Action. Forum members feel that the advancement of this collective, regional Plan is a constructive response to the mandate for regional action expressed in the Barbados Programme. In the context of overall economic development planning and assistance and of social and ecological concerns, Forum members continue to maintain a keen interest in having the United Nations adopt a vulnerability index. The existing criteria for determining eligibility for concessional aid and trade treatment and for critical classifications such as least developed country status are purely macroeconomic, without any consideration of the In last year’s general debate, the Forum expressed renewed hopes for the United Nations process to combat anthropogenic global warming, sea-level rise and other adverse effects of global climate change. We took a measure of pride that our group, which includes both Annex I and developing countries, found common ground at the political level to call for effective action, despite the widely differing circumstances of member States. It seemed that with the successful negotiation of the Kyoto Protocol, the world’s nations had finally recognized the need to begin taking action, on the basis of legally binding commitments, to achieve specified targets and timetables. Forum members were also relieved by the recognition that small island developing States have particular needs for assistance with adapting to the effects of climate change. We welcomed the formulation of specific tools, such as the Clean Development Mechanism, which promise to be useful in enabling island countries to do their part in combating combat climate change, within the framework and parameters of our own national circumstances. There is of course no time to be lost. People everywhere are experiencing the sometimes disastrous effects of climate change. From record-setting droughts to killer floods, hurricanes and typhoons, the effects of sea- level rise are already taking a toll on small island States. Unfortunately, even as scientific evidence of climate change has become impossible to ignore, the parties to the Convention have yet to go very far towards getting the Kyoto process under way. The political will of the Governments of the parties simply does not match the technical dedication of delegates to pursuing solutions at the numerous meetings that are taking place on this subject. Even though our spirits are bolstered by the encouragement of our annex I Forum partners Australia and New Zealand, the 14 Forum small island States grow weary of calling attention to our special vulnerability to climate change and to our status on the front line of potential worldwide catastrophe. I would sincerely hope that by now a great majority of people, not only in the United Nations system but from all across the globe, have a strong mental picture of the helpless situation of low-lying islands and coastlines in the face of rising seas. We are very grateful for the considerable extent to which our pleas have been taken into account, but while we may flatter ourselves that we have served, in a way, as a voice of conscience for the Framework Convention on Climate Change, we wish also to make positive contributions to its implementation. Thus, the emphasis of all Forum members now is to assure that we do our part to participate in and to advance the considerable amount of work that must be done. The South Pacific Regional Environmental Programme continues to serve our governments as a useful focal point and to provide valuable expertise. Forum countries have long been active in working to understand the potential of the Clean Development Mechanism for the region. The Republic of the Marshall Islands recently hosted an important workshop on the Clean Development Mechanism that was attended by more than 40 countries, and in June, Australia and the Forum secretariat hosted a workshop in Nadi. We are severely hampered, however, by the shortage of personnel and financial resources to maintain continuous participation in the host of ongoing activities. The United Nations and bilateral donors have been very generous in I know that this problem is by no means unique to Forum island countries, nor even to small developing countries as a group. But for us, as well as for many others, we ask that these limitations should not be disregarded by larger countries and organizations in the management of the international agenda. Once again, we express sincere appreciation for the support of donors that have made our participation possible. In addition, we would emphasize the importance of applying a coordinated approach to scheduling in order to facilitate the participation of small delegations that would not wish to be marginalized by overlapping meetings on topics of critical concern to us. Finally, another topic of concern for the Forum at the next annual meeting will be the continuing shipment by industrialized Powers of plutonium and radioactive wastes through our region. Forum nations have consistently expressed their concerns on this issue, especially about liability and compensation arrangements in the event of an accident. From 16 to 17 September this year, discussions took place in Suva between the legal experts of the Forum countries and the representatives of France, Japan and the United Kingdom concerning trans- shipments of nuclear materials through the region. This meeting was arranged by the Forum secretariat, in line with the 1998 Forum Communiqué. We are encouraged by this development and strongly urge the representatives of the three shipping States to demonstrate their readiness to explore innovative ways to address the concerns of Forum members: there is more at stake than the well- being and comfort of the larger populations in the North. Putting this disregard for the sovereign interests of Forum countries to one side for a moment, the Pacific Ocean is a vital breadbasket for the entire planet: any accident will have serious and adverse implications far beyond our shores for generations to come. Forum countries have derived some encouragement from the decision by France, Japan and the United Kingdom to consult with Forum members regarding safety and compensation arrangements for the most recent shipment of mixed oxide fuel from Europe to Japan. We are further encouraged by the decision of the three shipping States to provide information on the shipping routes of the two ships carrying the fuel, consistent with We, the Forum countries, earnestly hope to make some inroads, not only in the immediate situation but, more importantly, in the long run, into the ethical consciences of the developed nations. Since time immemorial they have regarded our region as a convenient area for any kind of dangerous or undesirable activity that serves their interests at home. With the welcome admission to this body of three more of our number, we are now numerous enough in this forum to assert forcefully that we wish no further invasion to place our peoples at risk, irrespective of the reasons others may have for choosing to disregard our concerns. I have by no means touched on every topic of concern that is to be discussed at the next Forum meeting. Following that meeting, as I stated earlier, the complete Communiqué will be submitted to this body, and I commend it to all delegations. The views I have expressed on behalf of the South Pacific Forum are, of course, fully embraced by my country, the Federated States of Micronesia. I would like now to address other issues, speaking only for my own small island developing State. Since 1991, when the Federated States of Micronesia was admitted to membership in this body, we have experienced — from the viewpoint of a developing country and particularly as a small island developing State — a truly unique decade in multilateral relations. We emerged on the international scene just in time to become a part of the movement that radically changed previous notions about development, namely the Rio process. The timing could not have been better for us. Just as we took up the task of formulating our own agenda for the future of our island nation, the world as a whole came to recognize that the issues of environment and development are not opposed but, rather, are intertwined. We thus incorporated into our development planning from the outset a mandate not just for development, but for sustainable development. We feel fortunate in this regard and in how the principle of sustainability is fully integral to our activities, for, while we are deeply appreciative of the concerns that other nations have shown for the difficulties faced by small island States like ourselves, and while we remain anxious for the further implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action, we realize that the action referred to must be, No amount of outside assistance can provide sustainable development. As small-island countries, we must individually and collectively commit ourselves to staying the course once we have seen it and possess the means to navigate it. Without that commitment, our sails will never fill and we will remain adrift on a journey that can only come to a sad end. As a new member of the international community, we have been faced with the need to rapidly become familiar with the dynamics of multilateral interaction within the United Nations system while at the same time trying to acquire a practical working knowledge of the various simultaneous processes. But there is no apprenticeship here at the United Nations. From the outset, it has been our full responsibility to participate, on a basis of equality, in the ongoing work of numerous bodies directly integral to the United Nations or related to it. It has been, and continues to be, a demanding experience, but inasmuch as we have learned about others, we are also learning more about ourselves and moving towards greater maturity as a nation. We have also developed a deep appreciation for the often unheralded but vital work of translating global problems into solutions that is pursued faithfully by the thousands of administrative and diplomatic members of the United Nations family. It is difficult to conceive of a future in which the nations of our ever-shrinking planet will not have a forum such as this — the United Nations. Yet one cannot help but be uneasy on hearing whispers of discouragement as the United Nations is challenged by issues that seem to grow in number and complexity. We sometimes hear that perhaps the Organization has outlived its usefulness and has inadequate capacity to deal with global crises in the areas of security, social justice and the environment. Some are said to feel that other, more sharply focused bodies would be better suited to dealing with the anticipated crises of the new millennium. In order to maintain and improve the responsiveness of the United Nations in a world of increasing demands and challenges, it is necessary that we continually evolve and adapt effectively in our pursuit of the ideals of the Charter of this Organization. Only in this way can we keep the Organization on a positive course and faithfully translate the mandates of the Charter into terms of continuing relevance. This is the attitude with which we must approach reform. It is not a consequence of inadequacy, which the word “reform” may suggest, but, rather, it is a positive and evolutionary process. This is easily said, but, as we all know, it is very difficult to put into practice. Even so, we must not allow that high degree of difficulty to plunge us into frustration and defeat. The great achievements of those who have come before us in the last 54 years must be honoured by our unshakable determination to take the United Nations seriously into the next millennium as the single most effective multilateral instrument for the betterment of humankind. If the United Nations is to maintain and even improve its capacity to deal with major issues and improve the lot of disadvantaged peoples, I respectfully suggest that there is a need for broader incorporation of developing countries in the decision-making process. More and more, it seems, a relatively small group of developed countries are seen on the front lines here and in other related international bodies. There is a perception that, despite the formal application of the rules, the substantive participation of developing countries in dealing with world problems is in reality waning rather than increasing. This does not bode well for the future of international relations. As the trend towards globalization continues to strengthen, this body as a whole will need to be more involved in making important decisions — not a permanent 5, not a G-7, but a “G-188”. Probably the single most urgently needed reform is the enlargement of the Security Council. Naturally, such an important step must not be taken in haste, but by this time we should be closer to finding an acceptable formulation. The plain fact is that the openness of the most powerful It would be unrealistic to ignore the inevitability of the fact that larger, more powerful nations will most often take the lead in the United Nations. In fact, they should do so as a matter of responsibility; they possess the resources and the capacity. However, leadership should not become domination, and it should not leave the developing world marginalized. I therefore emphasize the need for a restructured Security Council. I also visualize a General Assembly that remains in the forefront of global decision-making, for real outcomes on real issues. Being from a Pacific island nation, I naturally have particular concerns about our region. Without demeaning in any way the considerable attention that we do receive, I must say that the Pacific islands region often takes a back seat in the councils of the greater Powers, which are prone to include only the Pacific rim countries among their primary concerns. This can be understood, given our small populations and land masses, which only underscore our remoteness in the vast Pacific Ocean. But it should not be forgotten that we Pacific islanders are custodians of some of the world's greatest untapped wealth. In the coming millennium, our region is certain to play a greater role than ever before in meeting the needs of the rest of the world for food and mineral resources. If these resources are to be conserved in the proper way and harvested in a sustainable manner, the peoples of the Pacific islands must be dealt with fairly, and on a basis of partnership with the developed world. And the time to start is now. The growing global involvement with and reliance upon the tremendous resource base in our region must rest on a foundation of regional security. Nowhere is there a better example of the need for comprehensive security in the modern sense, extending beyond military considerations and also including economic, social and environmental security. This leads me to the present need for proper stewardship of the oceans and seas throughout the world. Furthermore, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provides the framework for action in this area. We thus have existing structures; there is no need to create new institutions. We believe that the size of the task will require continuing effort on an annual basis, so that an ongoing working-group format within the context of preparations for each annual General Assembly will be more rewarding than a large, one-time conference. Above all, the process must seek the widest possible input, drawing upon expertise at the regional level, and providing assistance to ensure the participation of developing countries, especially small island States. In these brief moments it is not possible to express all our views on all the matters we deem important. Of necessity, therefore, I must leave much to the work of our representatives in the Committees here and in other United Nations organs throughout the year. I wish, however, to plead with this body for a universal awakening to the single most important reality of our lives today. This reality is that all our interests become more closely linked with each passing generation. We are all responsible for turning back the consequences of our past selfish behaviour. The destruction of war, the improper stewardship of our natural resources and the pollution of our living space are looming global disasters. Combined, they will overwhelm the Earth's population unless we find common ground and take action. That common ground exists. It exists here. It does not ask us to surrender our nationhood or our cultures. It is the Charter of the United Nations, a visionary document that has guided our troubled world through the faltering steps of increasing multilateral awareness, and today provides a format for our very survival. God grant that we will have the political will to sustain it.

The Assembly will now hear an address by the President of the Republic of Zambia.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I have the honour to welcome to the United Nations the President of the Republic of Zambia, His Excellency Mr. Frederick Chiluba, and to invite him to address the Assembly. President Chiluba: I join other speakers who have already addressed the Assembly, Sir, in congratulating you on your well-deserved election as President of the General Assembly at its fifty-fourth session. Your unanimous election is a clear demonstration of the confidence this Assembly has in you and in your country, Namibia, with which my country enjoys very friendly and warm relations. It is especially significant that you come from Namibia, a country whose independence stands as a crowning moment in our Organization’s support for the right of peoples under colonial and foreign domination to self-determination and independence. I am confident that, given your experience and diplomatic skills, you will guide the work of this session successfully. I wish to take this opportunity to commend your predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Didier Opertti of Uruguay, for the able manner in which he presided over the fifty-third session. In the same vein, I would like to place on record my country’s deepest appreciation of the work of the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Kofi Annan, whose leadership is well respected and has given new impetus to the implementation of the United Nations reform programme. It goes without saying that since the membership of the United Nations has been growing, there should have been a continuous and corresponding process of reform of the decision-making structures and processes of the Organization in order to make the world body as representative as possible. It is a matter of considerable disappointment, however, that while reform of the administrative structures has, to a large degree, been accomplished, reform of the Security Council has not moved in tandem. As members are all aware, the creation of the United Nations was intended to strengthen international peace and security. Regrettably, a number of States continue to be threatened in our time by the dangerous proliferation of small arms and light weapons acquired by non-state entities. The continued proliferation and illegal transfer of small arms, among other factors, are responsible for the supply of the weapons being used in conflict situations across the African continent. I would therefore like to appeal to all Member States to support and strengthen the United Nations monitoring mechanisms on the transfer of these arms, particularly to non-state entities, in order to forestall this problem. Related to the problem of small arms is the question of landmines planted in large tracts of land in many countries, rendering unusable what otherwise is productive land. The impact of landmines has also had a telling toll on the provision of social services in the affected countries. I equally appeal to Member States, parties to the United Nations Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction, to implement the Maputo Declaration and programme of action, adopted in May this year. Only a strong and viable United Nations can constitute the much-needed viable vehicle to achieve this goal. That among many other reasons is why we want to build strong economies in Africa to enable us shoulder our obligations. But external debt remains both a burden and a major impediment to the development process of many developing countries, including my country, Zambia. While we welcome the recent outcome of the Group of Eight meeting held in Cologne, Germany, on the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Debt (HIPC) Initiative, the measures for faster, broader and deeper debt relief, in our view, will not be sufficient to resolve the external debt problem of developing countries, especially the poorest among them, unless they are translated into real tangible, practical economic development programmes. It is the view of my Government that the Group of Eight target for debt relief of about $100 billion for the poorest countries in the world, the majority of which are in Africa, will have little effect on the problem unless the terms of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Debt Initiative are further revised in such a way as to make them more flexible and better tailored to suit the specific conditions of the targeted countries. Many of us in the developing countries understand that, in order to survive and contribute positively in the global markets, we need to make our economies more competitive. In this regard, many of our countries have embarked on the implementation of structural adjustment programmes. Our efforts are, however, hampered by the huge debt burden which takes away large amounts of resources from our countries through debt servicing. The declining levels of official development assistance and foreign direct investment to our countries, combined with the debt burden, have made economic reforms difficult and have slowed down the pace of economic growth and development. Added to that problem is the spread of HIV/AIDS. This is a matter of grave concern to my country and to Africa as a whole. This disease has continued to overwhelm the continent and to rob it of its meagre material and financial resources through devastation of its youthful and active population. It is therefore necessary for all humanity to rise to regard HIV/AIDS as a global problem and to act in unison. I therefore call upon the international community to redouble its efforts in fighting this scourge. Let me take this opportunity to report to this body that last week, from 12 to 16 September 1999, Zambia hosted the eleventh International Conference on AIDS and Sexually Transmitted Diseases in Africa. The holding of that Conference, which adopted a programme of action to fight the spread of this deadly disease in Africa in the twenty- first century, is among other things a demonstration of the African continent’s commitment to fight against this deadly disease. It is my hope that the United Nations will therefore embrace the outcome of the Conference and provide the necessary leadership in the fight against this pandemic, which threatens the very survival of humankind. The AIDS problem deserves our collective moral and political will to combat it successfully. Let me now turn to the phenomenon of the conflicts which have continued to bedevil Africa. In our own Southern African subregion, the conflicts in Angola and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are not only a threat to peace and security but have also been a major impediment to the economic development of the region. The resumption of hostilities in Angola in December 1998, after four years of relative peace following the signing of the Lusaka Protocol, is regrettable. As the Assembly is aware, this unfortunate state of affairs was occasioned by the intransigence of UNITA with regard to the implementation of the remaining tasks under the Lusaka Protocol. Every effort should therefore be made to bring an end to the hostilities. With regard to the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Assembly will recall that on 2 August 1998 a conflict erupted in that country. In response to this serious development, a series of efforts by regional heads of State and the Organization of African Unity (OAU) were immediately undertaken in search of a peaceful solution to the conflict. At the summit held at Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe, from 7 to 8 September 1998, the regional heads For a period of almost a year, I have, on behalf of our region, carried out exhaustive consultations inside and outside Zambia, and convened a number of meetings at the level of experts and Foreign Affairs and Defence Ministers. Let me state here that, right from the outset, regional leaders acknowledged the need to involve the Congolese rebel movement in the mediation process to ensure that the outcome would be respected by and acceptable to all. The process initially engaged the rebel movement through a proximity mechanism. Later, however, the rebels, who now included the Movement for the Liberation of the Congo (MLC), were invited to participate directly in the peace talks with all the other parties to the conflict. On 10 July 1999, our perseverance on the regional and Pan-African levels finally paid off when heads of State of all the six States parties to the conflict signed the Ceasefire Agreement in Lusaka. Unfortunately, a split in the Congolese Rally for Democracy (RCD) the previous May led to differences over who should sign the Agreement on behalf of the movement, which prevented them from appending their signature on that occasion. The other non-State party to the conflict, the MLC, also chose not to sign the Agreement until the differences within the RCD were resolved. In order to secure the signatures of the RCD and the MLC, I was mandated by the regional heads of State to carry out further consultations with the two movements. I am pleased to inform the Assembly that these efforts culminated in the signing of the Ceasefire Agreement by the MLC and the RCD on 1 August and 31 August 1999 respectively. Allow me at this juncture to place on record my sincere appreciation for the cooperation and assistance I received from all my colleagues in the region and other African leaders, the United Nations, OAU and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) in the execution of my mandate. The Ceasefire Agreement is an all-embracing document which addresses all aspects of the conflict, including the security concerns of all the countries neighbouring the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I wish to inform the Assembly that the implementation process of the Agreement has already Among the issues considered by the meetings were: first, the formal installation of the Chairman of the Commission, Brigadier-General Rachid Lallali, from Algeria; the budget of the Joint Military Commission; its structures; and its programme of work. The representative of OAU briefed the meetings on OAU activities in support of the peace process in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the United Nations representative briefed them on the relationship that is expected to prevail between the United Nations and the Joint Military Commission. The Commission is scheduled to meet again on 10 October 1999. For peace to prevail in the Democratic Republic of Congo, United Nations support for the successful and comprehensive implementation of the Ceasefire Agreement is of paramount importance. For this reason, I wish to commend the Secretary-General for his timely and positive response in sending a team of military liaison personnel to the region. The United Nations must move more expeditiously than it has in the past if the job it does is to be commensurate with the tasks facing it in the field. To this end, I make an earnest appeal to the United Nations that the Organization, first, should authorize and support the deployment of a United Nations peacekeeping force in the Democratic Republic of the Congo with an appropriate mandate and, on an appropriate scale, based on the assessed needs on the ground; second, it should quickly dispatch the technical survey team to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in addition to the team of military liaison personnel which has already been sent to that country and some of its neighbours; third, it should make available adequate resources for the peacekeeping mission; fourth, it should extend necessary and adequate support to facilitate the process of internal dialogue within the Democratic Republic of the Congo; fifth, it should help in the mobilization of humanitarian assistance for the Congolese refugees and internally displaced persons and facilitate their return and resettlement; and sixth, it should assist with resources for the economic reconstruction of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I need not remind the Assembly of the solemn and important responsibility that the United Nations bears on Time is of the essence. What is equally of the essence is the need to address the root causes of the poverty confronting third world countries. The world community must tackle those root causes with speed and urgency. This session of the General Assembly is meeting against a backdrop of growing tensions and armed conflicts, especially in the third world. These developments, coming towards the close of the twentieth century, are an indictment of the world’s global structures, which pose today, more than at any other time in history, a challenge to the very articles of faith upon which this organization was founded. The challenges cannot be wished away, nor can they be remedied by empty words. Global poverty can be eradicated only with a concerted global programme. Solving the issue of poverty would solve the problem of conflict and instability in the developing countries, and unless the world addresses these underlying causes of conflict, they will continue to be major sources of friction that will threaten and undermine international peace and security. Events in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Kosovo and now in East Timor cannot but exert more pressure on the time and resources of the international community in general and particularly on the Security Council. But this is the mission of that world body: to attend to just such areas of conflict. Admittedly, these are the most perilous times Africa has ever faced. The multiple dangers of armed conflict and general political instability and the ever-growing danger posed by the HIV/AIDS pandemic can only call for concerted joint world efforts to help reduce the dangers that face Africa and the world in general. There are various ways the world can come to the aid of Africa, the most important of which are through aid and by creating conditions to make it possible for Africa to trade with the international community on terms acceptable to all. Africa is not asking for charity. No, Africa is asking for genuine trade. Africa is not asking for arms. No, Africa is asking for fair and equitable recompense for its labour and resources. Africa is not asking for pity, but genuine partnership based on mutual interests. A start should now be made by reviewing the inequitable conditions imposed by the World Trade Organization, which, if maintained, will only ensure continued marginalization of third world countries, condemning them to poverty and further instability. I am quite aware that this forum may not be the appropriate one for addressing these issues, but it definitely has the right people to address the issues I have raised. Therefore, my fervent prayer and hope is that we enter the new millennium with a renewed sense of unity of purpose to eradicate manifest global injustices and create a more equitable world where want will not create chaos and instability.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the Republic of Zambia for the statement he has just made.

As members can see, it has taken us almost three hours to hear five speakers, and we still have seven speakers remaining on the list for this meeting. In order to accommodate all the remaining speakers on the list, this meeting will most likely continue for at least another two hours. In this connection, I would like to again remind members that the General Assembly, in paragraph 21 of the annex to resolution 51/241, indicated a voluntary guideline of up to 20 minutes for each statement in the general debate. I strongly appeal to speakers to make an extra effort to observe this 20-minute voluntary guideline for the general debate so that we can finish hearing all speakers at a reasonable hour. I thank you for your kind cooperation.

The Assembly will now hear an address by the Prime Minister of Saint Kitts and Nevis.

I have great pleasure in welcoming the Prime Minister of Saint Kitts and Nevis, The Honourable Denzil Douglas, and inviting him to address the General Assembly.

I wish most heartily to congratulate you, Sir, on your election to lead this body at this most significant time, as we stand at the threshold of the new millennium. I am persuaded that your antecedents, both in your own country and here at the United Nations, have eminently prepared you for the role that you have been elected to fill. I, for my part, pledge the total support and assistance of my delegation for the accomplishment of your great task. I would also like to pay tribute to the work of your predecessor, the Foreign Minister of Uruguay, a representative of the Group of Latin America and Caribbean States, who steered the General Assembly through the difficult period of the fifty-third session. Once again, I would like to express my unreserved esteem for the Secretary-General, whose charm, affability and intellect have been of great benefit to the United Nations system. It is clear to all that Mr. Kofi Annan is making a unique contribution to the development of this, our Organization. My country, Saint Kitts and Nevis, its Government, its people and myself heartily commend the Secretary-General. May I take this opportunity to say a word of welcome and congratulations to the three new Member States admitted at the opening of this fifty-fourth session: the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga. As representative of a small island State from the Caribbean, I am happy to welcome them as small island States from the Pacific region. I recognize that even though they have only now attained full membership in the United Nations they are well seized of their obligations and they will play their full part in upholding the principles of the Charter. Once again I congratulate them and wish them well for the future. The recent development in Kosovo, the terribly disturbing stories of the human tragedy that befell its people, the injustices that were highlighted during that conflict — all this constitutes a severe limitation in the work of the United Nations. My Government takes the view that genocidal activity, from whichever sources it emanates, is unacceptable and a violation of international law. The United Nations must therefore be vigilant as it continues its pacification efforts. Now that the job of rebuilding is under way, let us look forward — look forward with hope to an era of peace and reconstruction — and let us hope that what may have seemed initially a failure may turn out to be part of the striking success of the United Nations. As if there is to be no respite from the challenges affecting this body, while we thought we were overcoming the problems of Kosovo there flared up the problem of East Timor. Saint Kitts and Nevis, as a small State, has been appalled at the wanton violence and death visited upon the East Timorese people since the referendum. This world body must roundly condemn the inhumane activities perpetrated against the people of East Timor only because in seeking to fulfil their aspirations to live as a sovereign people, they gave legitimate expression them. My Government would like to commend the work of the Secretary-General and all others who have sought to pull us back from this abyss of human disaster. Saint Kitts and Nevis urges the Indonesian authorities to discharge their obligations with maturity and to work together with the international community for the preservation of the peace and the protection of the people of East Timor. We welcome the acceptance by the Indonesian authorities of an international protective force and we pray that the people of East Timor will have their rights respected and be able to develop in freedom and democracy. We commend the recent commitment of the international community to the We still hope, however, that there will be equal responsiveness to the people of the Great Lakes region and the rest of sub-Saharan Africa. Since I have referred to the outrages in areas of the world which constitute a dark blot on the human condition, perhaps I ought to balance my remarks by recognizing that, in one area of the world, the Middle East, where peace for such a long time seemed illusive, a process of peace is now finally under way. I should place on record the appreciation of my country for all those who are assisting in the process of peace. We must continue to support the efforts of the peacemakers in order to ensure that the rhetoric of violence is silenced. Saint Kitts and Nevis urges the United Nations and fellow world leaders to work towards preserving the integrity of the country and the people of Kuwait and to ensure that they enjoy the dignity of life without fear. The territorial integrity of their national must be respected and preserved and the Security Council solution concerning Iraqi aggression in Kuwait should be fully implemented. By the same token, Saint Kitts and Nevis notes the peace process in Ireland and compliments all those who are contributing to the process. The world community should give its support to this initiative so that those who are seeking to retard the process of peaceful development will find no encouragement. At this point, Saint Kitts and Nevis would like to express profound condolences to the Government of the Republic of China on Taiwan on the loss of lives which resulted from the recent devastating earthquake. We hope that the process of recovery will be speedy. I call on the international community, therefore, to come to the assistance of Taiwan, which in times past has assisted willingly in bringing relief to countries facing similar disasters. Let me know say a word about the unsettled issue of the Chinese people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. In doing so, let me first make it clear that it never has been and is not now the intention of my country to interfere in the internal affairs or to give offence to any State Member of the United Nations. Saint Kitts and Nevis is persuaded that the Chinese people have the capacity and the accumulated wisdom to find a solution to whatever their differences appear to be, but our relationship with In addition to the scourges of human conflict, there are other evils which still stare us in the face in these last few months of the closing year of the century. Poverty still confronts the vast majority of mankind. Children are still dying of malnutrition and some, in order to get food, have to allow themselves to be victimized and turned into cannon fodder. Some still do not get an education. Indeed, there are many children around the world who do not enjoy a childhood. I am happy that the United Nations has declared the decade beginning 2001 to be the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-violence for the Children of the World. The new millennium belongs to our children. It belongs to our children in Saint Kitts and Nevis and to the children of the world. We have a duty to help make, for them and with them, a better world than the one in which we now live. Additionally, I have noted that the agenda for this fifty-fourth session includes an item entitled “Building a peaceful and better world through sport and the Olympic ideal”. Saint Kitts and Nevis wishes to place on record its country's support for that item, as we are doing everything in our power to build the development of our youth through sports. By the same token, I am proud to report that our educational policies are yielding very positive results. We in Saint Kitts and Nevis have achieved a 98 per cent literacy rate and we have not only begun, but are intensifying the process of making all of our young people computer-literate and equipped to face the challenges of the new dawning century. Saint Kitts and Nevis welcomes the assistance of the international community to enable us to realize our objectives in this regard and to give this programme even greater forward thrust. It is our view that the technological advancement of the past 54 years, instead of creating dislocations, should be used to improve understanding. It should be used to improve efficiency of production and to provide better We applaud the progress being made with regard to women in development since the adoption of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action at the Fourth World Conference on Women on 15 September 1995. Our country has demonstrated its unswerving commitment to gender equity by our participation in the Committee on the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). For its part, Saint Kitts and Nevis is currently implementing a new gender management system and is introducing measures to ensure that the national budget in my country is more sensitive to gender issues. We are grateful to the Commonwealth Fund for Technical Cooperation for technical assistance in this regard. In a few days, the United Nations will convene a special session of the General Assembly for the review and appraisal of the implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action for the small island developing States. We trust that the international community will give due recognition to the efforts being made by small island States to implement their commitments under the Programme of Action and note that those efforts have been affected by financial and other resource constraints and by global, economic and environmental factors. We look forward, therefore, to the international community's providing continued support for capacity- and institution- building programmes and projects in the small island developing States. In the meantime, my Government welcomes the continued efforts of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) in promoting the interests and concerns of small island States. All small island developing States, like those of us in the Caribbean, are susceptible to the vagaries of nature as well as to man-made difficulties. Just last week our brothers and sisters in the Bahamas, like those along the south-eastern coastal states of the United States of America, suffered terrible and destructive losses as a result of hurricane Floyd. I urge States Members of the United Nations to be generous in their support for any reconstruction endeavours for the thousands of displaced people. I have dealt with this at some length because Saint Kitts and Nevis wishes to thank the Assembly for the support expressed in that decision. We hereby place on record that we have received assistance from the United Nations system and, in particular, from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and I assure the representatives in this world body that our efforts at rehabilitation have proceeded with what some have described as remarkable speed. But, however commendable emergency assistance is, it is not a formula for long-term, sustainable development. Countries such as ours need the continued support of the international community to ensure that our development is not sacrificed on the altar of globalization and trade liberalization. How will the banana farmers in Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Dominica, or the sugar- cane workers in Saint Kitts and Nevis preserve the integrity of their families? How will they preserve the dignity of a good standard of living when the impersonal tentacles of globalization reach out to deprive them of the resources they need to survive? Human rights, in their purest and most practical sense, embody the human condition in all its basic elements. Therefore, the United Nations, as a major guarantor of these rights, should act as a counterbalance to globalization, which has begun to take food away from our people instead of helping them. The World Trade Organization is expected to play a key role in promoting trade liberalization, thereby fuelling the globalization process. The World Trade Organization, however, is not a panacea for the ills of world trade. No new rules can alter the fact that in most areas of exports, developed countries will have a comparative advantage over developing countries. It is a basic principle in economics that a country with a comparative advantage in producing goods and services in given areas will always make money A regime, therefore, of unrestricted trade can lead to tremendous shocks in the economy of the less developed countries with very critical repercussions for their citizens. As part of the Caribbean Community, we have already witnessed how the logic of applying the same rules to all, regardless of the level of economic development, has led to serious dislocation within the banana-producing countries of our Caribbean subregion. Saint Kitts and Nevis would prefer to see this body, through the United Nations Conference on Trade on Development (UNCTAD), take up the issue of what happens to countries caught in the toils of a free-trade regime. Saint Kitts and Nevis believes that this matter requires careful study by experts with a global perspective and it is our view that the United Nations is the one Organization capable of studying this issue objectively and putting recommendations before the leaders of the world to remedy what could potentially be a disaster for small, vulnerable economies. By and large, a country such as Saint Kitts and Nevis, which depends upon a buoyant tourist sector, the export of sugar and the provision of financial services cannot — I repeat, cannot — object in principle to a world of open economies. But our position is that a world economic order predicated upon open economies works best with countries whose economies are roughly equal. If we are committed to eradicating poverty in every area of this world, then we must address the implications for poverty that are inherent in trading arrangements. Those of us who live in the Caribbean, mostly in developing countries and small island States, are vulnerable and also affected by, inter alia, lack of capacity and human resource bases, the need for financial resources, social problems, high levels of poverty and the effects of globalization. We rely heavily on the coastal areas, as well as the marine environment in general, to achieve sustainable development, and meet our needs and goals. For us, in the context of sustainable development, the Caribbean Sea must be seen as a special area. Saint Kitts and Nevis earnestly expects that Member States, the international community and the United Nations system will actively support our efforts in order to develop and implement this concept and take action so as to avert the Despite the socio-economic quagmire that bedevils and undermines our efforts, my Government has remained steadfast. It has remained committed to create more opportunities for the people of Saint Kitts and Nevis. But we are aware that the Government cannot solve these problems alone. There is a critical role for the private sector as well. My Government is equally committed to working with local and international businesses, without, however, surrendering the fate of our nation to disinterested forces that could wreak further havoc on their lives. My Government repeats its call for an expansion of the interpretation of human rights to incorporate fully economic rights and the right to development. In recognizing that there is an inseparable link between the human rights and economic rights of the individual, my Government has pledged to continue our programme to build affordable houses, create jobs, fight poverty and pursue new sources of local and foreign investment. My Government will be an avid partner and facilitator of business without compromising the quality of life for each of our citizens. There is an important part for national Governments to play in the protection of their citizens’ human rights, but there is a more substantial, comprehensive and far-reaching role for the United Nations as ultimate protector of the entire body of human rights. This means that there should be a greater partnership between the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the United Nations human rights mechanisms and other agencies and organs. In this way, new strategies can be devised for opening access to markets for those countries that continue to find themselves on the periphery of the international trading system. The Organization should help to create and investigate practical alternatives. Hence, I maintain that we need a United Nations that is informed by the inequities of the world economic systems, and is able to respond to the social challenges that are being exacerbated as a result. We do our best to achieve the eradication of poverty. Saint Kitts and Nevis seeks the support of the international community, thus building a bridge to a better world. Tomorrow’s world should open with our people finding answers to the request to give them each day their daily Last year I spoke of the viability of social-venture philanthropy through which Governments and businesses may collaborate with each other. This concept already exists at a similar level within many corporate structures. Companies are already engaged in projects that enhance and maintain a positive corporate image. We would take this further if companies would recognize the importance of preserving a good corporate culture by improving the standard of living of the national constituencies in which they do profitable business. A reformed United Nations, with its existing organs, funds and programmes, can help to implement such strategies. We must move with informed haste, because I fear that if we fail to translate the benefits of democracy, technological growth and economic wealth into tangible gains for our people, future chaos will not be far behind. I am one of those who refuse to accept that the developed world could be ignorant of the challenges facing the small and poor economies. I am reluctant to think that national interests could be so blinding that Governments neglect to realize that the problems plaguing any one region, for instance, have serious ramifications much further afield. We have to recommit to the elimination of the potent cancer of illicit drugs and global consequences. We are all victims. Therefore, we must all become partners. Let us commit to root out the menace of narco-trafficking that is becoming embedded in our various societies. I dare say that the multitude of problems before us is complex and very involved. The old paradigms that prevailed in the cold war have outlived their usefulness. It is not only those elements that directly threaten our political and strategic interests, but also those factors that undermine a country’s ability to preserve its economic, social and cultural fabric that should guide national interests. There is no longer one giant enemy, but there are a number of persistent factors that could conspire at any one time to destroy the delicate balance of our societies. In spite of all the shortcomings of this body, if the United Nations did not exist, it would be necessary to invent it, because there is no other organization that has contributed as much to the development of humankind. Without the United Nations, a micro State such as Saint Kitts and Nevis would never have been heard. Therefore, as we cross over into the new millennium, Saint Kitts and Nevis joins with the rest of the world as we commit ourselves to the continued development of the United Nations in order to ensure that all people everywhere will enjoy the fulfilment of the promise of peace, prosperity and progress.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the Prime Minister of Saint Kitts and Nevis for the statement he has just made.

The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Pakistan, His Excellency Mr. Sartaj Aziz, on whom I now call.

Mr.President, it is an honour to address the General Assembly at this session, the last to be held in the twentieth century. May I begin by welcoming the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga to the family of the United Nations. We look forward to working closely with the new Members. The twentieth century has been described as the age of extremes. In this century, human civilization made quantum strides in progress and prosperity. We discovered the ocean depths, travelled into the outer space and landed on the moon. We have witnessed the technological and information revolutions transforming the wide world into a global village. This session of the Assembly offers an opportunity to identify the major global challenges which humankind is likely to confront in the next century. The United Nations should therefore devote the next year to evolving ways and means to address these challenges and to promoting an agreed approach next year at the Millennium Assembly. Peace remains the foremost challenge of our times. The end of the cold war and the triumph of the principles of democracy and free markets created hope for the dawn of universal peace. This, unfortunately, turned out to be elusive. Instead, conflicts have continued to ravage the world. Long-suppressed national aspirations, as well as frustration with continuing inequity and deprivation, have led to widespread violence and wars, between and within States. The several conflicts afflicting Africa, the Balkans and the Caucasus, as well as Palestine, Kashmir and Afghanistan, are painful reminders of the ascendance of war and the absence of peace. The United Nations, under the wise leadership of Secretary-General Kofi Annan, has endeavoured to cope with these conflicts and crises. Unilateral approaches, accompanying the centralization of global influence, have not always ensured just and durable solutions to complex problems rooted in history, religion, politics and economics in various parts of the world. In the final and decisive confrontation of the cold war, 1.5 million Afghans were killed, a million were maimed, and a whole country was destroyed. Ten years after the foreign intervention ended, almost 3 million Afghan refugees are still in Pakistan and Iran. With no reconstruction and no development in that poor country, the new generation knows nothing but war. Rehabilitation and reconstruction are the right of the valiant Afghan people. Economic development, accompanied by education and modernization, is the best way to end violence, promote human rights and improve social conditions in Afghanistan. Peace in Afghanistan is vital for Pakistan. Turmoil in Afghanistan creates turbulence on our frontier. The preservation of Afghanistan’s territorial integrity is pivotal Pakistan has persisted in promoting peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan. We support the efforts of the United Nations as well as the “six plus two” process. Pakistan is constantly endeavouring to bring about an end to the fighting and promote reconciliation and political accommodation between the Taliban Government and the Northern Alliance. The world has welcomed the resumption of the peace process in the Middle East. We earnestly hope that it will proceed smoothly to culminate in the establishment of a just and durable peace based on the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to their own State, and the withdrawal of Israel from the Syrian Golan Heights and southern Lebanon. We are glad that the tension between morality and legality has been overcome in Kosovo. We are happy the Kosovar refugees have returned home. Yet Kosovo’s travails are not over. Pakistan will continue to support the efforts of the United Nations for peace in the Balkans. In East Timor, we trust that the human tragedy has ended, even as the United Nations peacekeepers arrive there. I wish to pay tribute to Secretary-General Kofi Annan and my compatriot, Ambassador Jamsheed Marker, who were greatly challenged in the process of fostering freedom in East Timor while safeguarding stability. We have learned valuable lessons from Kosovo and East Timor: a people’s aspiration for freedom cannot be suppressed indefinitely; a free exercise of the right of self-determination is indispensable for peace; self- determination can be best exercised in an environment free of fear and coercion; and the United Nations is best placed to oversee the exercise of self-determination. These conclusions were already accepted for Kashmir 50 years ago. The Security Council decided that the final disposition of the disputed State of Kashmir should be determined by its people, in a free and impartial plebiscite held under United Nations auspices. India resiled from its acceptance of this agreement and from its own pledge to allow the Kashmiri people to decide their own future. On one pretext or another, it refused to implement the provisions of Security Council resolutions. To this end, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, soon after assuming office two and a half years ago, proposed the initiation of a comprehensive, structured and sustained dialogue between Pakistan and India to address Kashmir, peace and security and other outstanding issues. India agreed, after one year, to a dialogue on Kashmir. To provide political momentum to the bilateral dialogue, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif invited Prime Minister Vajpayee to visit Pakistan. At the Lahore summit, India and Pakistan committed themselves to intensify their efforts to resolve Kashmir, build mutual confidence and peace and pave the way for broader cooperation. In Lahore, the Pakistan Prime Minister urged his Indian counterpart to ease the repression in Kashmir. He cautioned that without progress on Kashmir political dynamics could compromise the good intentions reflected in the Lahore Declaration. But India displayed no desire to genuinely address, let alone resolve, the Kashmir issue. Its cruel repression of the Kashmiri people continued unabated. The Kargil crisis was a manifestation of the deeper malaise spawned by the unresolved Kashmir problem and India's escalating repression of the Kashmiri people. India launched a massive military operation in Kargil and threatened a wider conflict by mobilizing its armed forces all along the Pakistan-India international border. Pakistan acted with restraint. We believed that war between two nuclear-armed neighbours must be avoided. We offered immediate de-escalation and negotiations to address problems along the Line of Control, including India's violation of this Line and occupation of Chorbatla, Siachen and Qamar. Pakistan's efforts led to the disengagement by the Kashmiri freedom fighters from the Kargil heights and offered a renewed opportunity for negotiation and dialogue. Pakistan is ready for the resumption of the Lahore process with India. However, instead of reciprocating Pakistan's willingness to pursue negotiations, India has posed preconditions for resuming the talks. The Indian military deliberately shot down an unarmed Pakistan naval aircraft on a routine flight within our airspace, killing 16 of our naval personnel — mostly young Kashmir is not a dispute over land. It is about the destiny of a people; it is about implementation of the resolutions of the Security Council; it is about respect for the fundamental rights of the Kashmiri people, especially their right to self-determination. The complete boycott by the Kashmiris of the sham elections in Kashmir organized by India earlier this month is clear testimony of their total alienation from India. No settlement can be durable if it is contrary to their wishes. The Kashmir issue cannot be frozen while its people are determined to secure their freedom; while the blood of Kashmiri martyrs is being shed by the bullets and bayonets of the 700,000-strong Indian occupation force. Human rights must be upheld not only in Kosovo and Timor, but also in Kashmir. To make progress towards a settlement, the world must demand that India take immediate steps to halt its repression of the Kashmiri people. For this purpose, India must: first, stop the cruel crackdowns against Kashmiri villages and urban areas; second, release the thousands of Kashmiris held in detention centres and jails; third, remove military pickets and troops stationed in Kashmiri towns and villages; fourth, allow the presence of international human rights organizations in Kashmir; fifth, agree to the stationing of impartial human rights monitors in Jammu and Kashmir; sixth, entrust the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) with a larger role in Kashmir, including the provision of relief and help to the thousands of Kashmiri widows and orphans; and, seventh, agree to a progressive reduction of the 700,000 Indian troops deployed in Kashmir. The international community is increasingly conscious of the imperative for a just resolution of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute. The risk of a wider conflict cannot be contemplated in a nuclear environment. Kashmir remains on the Security Council's agenda. The Council's resolutions remain to be implemented. The promise of self- determination made by the United Nations to the Kashmiri people remains to be fulfilled. Therefore, while we will, hopefully, soon resume bilateral talks with India, Pakistan would welcome the association of the genuine representatives of the Kashmiri people with the negotiating process to promote a solution consistent with the United Nations Security Council resolutions. Even after our tests, Pakistan proposed nuclear restraint to India, consistent with our conviction that nuclear deterrence can and should be maintained between Pakistan and India at the lowest possible level. In our separate dialogues with the United States and India, we proposed a strategic restraint regime outlining specific measures for nuclear restraint and stabilization, conventional arms balance and the resolution of outstanding disputes. Hopes for restraint have been shattered by the announcement of India's nuclear doctrine, setting out plans to acquire and operationally deploy a huge arsenal of land-, air- and sea-based nuclear weapons and to further build up its conventional forces, almost all of which are deployed against Pakistan. Even the Indian offer of non-first use of nuclear weapons is designed to gain it acceptance as a nuclear-weapon State and to justify the acquisition of a massive nuclear arsenal as a second-strike capability. India's pursuit of this doctrine will destabilize South Asia. Pakistan will be compelled to enhance its nuclear and missile capabilities and operational readiness to preserve deterrence. India must test again to develop warheads for its missiles. This would subvert the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). India's quest for its large nuclear arsenal could jeopardize prospects for the conclusion of a fissile material cut-off treaty. India's ambitions threaten peace and stability not only in South Asia, but also in adjacent regions, including the Gulf and the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean. The international community must act — and it must act immediately — if it is to avoid a hair-trigger security environment in South Asia, with grave implications for For this purpose, it should urge India to do the following. First, India should disavow the proposed nuclear doctrine. Secondly, it should refrain from any further nuclear tests and adhere to the CTBT. For its part, Pakistan remains committed to adhering to the CTBT in an atmosphere free of coercion. Thirdly, it should undertake not to operationally deploy nuclear weapons on land, air or sea. Fourthly, it should open negotiations with Pakistan for an agreement to achieve balance in fissile material stocks, while both India and Pakistan participate in the fissile material treaty negotiations, expected to commence early next year in Geneva. Fifthly, India should eschew the acquisition of anti-ballistic missile systems and any military-related capabilities in space; and sixthly, cut back drastically on its plans to purchase and develop various advanced and destabilizing conventional weapons systems. In this context, Pakistan appeals to those countries which intend to supply these conventional weapons to India to reconsider their policies. Pakistan believes that it is now essential to convene a conference, with the participation of all the permanent members of the Security Council and other interested Powers, as well as Pakistan and India, to promote the goals of strategic restraint and stability in South Asia. The threat of nuclear war does not emanate only from South Asia. Although the strategic confrontation of the cold war is over, the major nuclear Powers, even while pressing for non-proliferation by others, have asserted their own right to possess nuclear weapons indefinitely. The implementation of strategic arms reduction agreements is stalled. If the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty is rescinded or revised, and missile defence plans are implemented, the nuclear-arms race may well be revived among the nuclear-weapon States. And heightened tensions among them, over new or old disputes, could once again move the nuclear doomsday clock closer to midnight. Pakistan supports the endeavours to achieve nuclear disarmament and the early elimination of all nuclear weapons. Multilateral negotiations can evolve agreed plans to realize these vital objectives. We also support the call for preserving the ABM Treaty and avoiding the development and deployment of anti-ballistic missile systems. Negotiations to prevent the further militarization of outer In a globalized yet divided world, with modern weaponry and communications available to almost everyone, terrorism has emerged as a pervasive challenge in many parts of the world. It is a complex phenomenon with many manifestations, a lethal tool used by ruthless individuals, groups and States. Pakistan condemns terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, wherever it occurs. For a decade, during the Afghan war, Pakistan was the single largest target of terrorism from across our borders. Even today, our adversaries foment fear in Pakistani cities by sponsoring and financing terrorist bomb blasts and random violence. Our eastern neighbour has mastered the black art of state terrorism in Kashmir, utilizing the tactics of crack-downs, custodial killings, disappearances, arson, torture and rape, as tools of repression against the Kashmiri people's struggle for freedom and self-determination. It is with good reason that the non-aligned countries have denounced the repression of peoples under foreign occupation as the worst form of terrorism. Pakistan condemns the reprehensible tendency in certain quarters to link manifestations of terrorism with Islam. We welcome the resolution adopted earlier this year by the Commission on Human Rights which denounced attempts, including in the media, to defame Islam and link it with terrorism. Free markets and free political systems, accompanied by breath-taking technological advances, are rapidly integrating our world across frontiers and continents. Unfortunately, most developing countries have been bypassed by the benefits of globalization. Income inequality has increased among and within countries. And, as the Asian financial crisis showed, growth has often been fragile. Market forces alone will not yield an equitable economic outcome for all peoples. At the tenth United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD X) and other international conferences, we need to rethink current development strategies and formulate new approaches for broad-based development, guided by the need for economic equity for individuals and nations. Action is required in three main areas. First, in the area of trade, we need a truly level playing field to Secondly, in the financial area, we need a more stable financial order which can control the volatility of capital flows, make available adequate liquidity, especially for the developing countries, alleviate their debt burden, and ensure coherence between global financial and trade policies. The high level “event” on financing for development could help to build agreement on these issues. Thirdly, technology: in an increasingly knowledge- based global economy, the technology and knowledge gap between the developed and developing countries must be rapidly narrowed. To this end, it would be useful to evolve global principles and guidelines for access to and transfer of technology. In our globalizing yet fractured world, marked by stark contrasts between prosperity and poverty, between tranquillity and turbulence, the hopes of hundreds of millions of people lie in the United Nations, the most universal global institution. The United Nations must play its role, as prescribed in the Charter, as the centre for the harmonization of the policies of Member States and as the central instrument for collective security. The Security Council's procedures must be made more transparent and democratic, to reflect the collective will and views of all States Members of the United Nations. The Assembly must also agree on the objectives and principles and the approaches and instruments which will enable the international community to respond to the emerging challenges posed by conflicts, arms proliferation and unequal globalization. It is here, at the United Nations, that we must seek consistent respect for the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter, and respect for its binding decisions. Only thus can we realize the vision of peace and prosperity for all peoples in a global environment of freedom and democracy.

I should like to express my most sincere congratulations to Mr. Gurirab on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly at this session. It is significant that his country, which gained independence as a result of the struggle of its people and the successful efforts of this Organization, will be presiding today over this Assembly and will, I am certain, bring its work to a successful conclusion. I extend my congratulations to his predecessor for the commitment with which he conducted his duties. I express our warmest support to the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, for his tireless efforts. He has used his competent political skill, his moral authority and his deep knowledge of the opportunities and limitations of his office to pursue daunting tasks, often working against all odds. My Government fully subscribes to the statement delivered by Ms. Halonen, the Foreign Minister of Finland, on behalf of the European Union, and to the memorandum circulated by the Union. Globalization in the field of information, ideas, the economy, democracy and human rights has been the dominant feature of the last years of our century. Some people fear it; some try to ignore it; a few try to fight it; others try to avoid it. Many welcome it as a creative challenge. We Greeks are among the last category: we thrive on openness, freedom of exchange, freedom of thought, expression and inquiry. We speak the language of dialogue, the language of ideas. That is our tradition. We are proud of that tradition which sparked off the Renaissance and supported the Enlightenment, whose essence was captured by Immanuel Kant's motto sapere aude: dare to think. Globalization challenges us to dare to think the unthinkable in terms of sovereignty, international relations and human rights. But that is not enough: we know we must go beyond it; we must dare to state a vision for our world; we must dare to hope. We take heart that at the end of our century democracy is being celebrated as the universal system of political rule, the only secure basis for legitimacy in the modern world. Experience teaches us that democracy not only institutionalizes freedom but also brings prosperity. Celebrated economist Amartya Sen has conclusively proved that a democratic system of Government is no obstacle to the creation of wealth: development does not We take heart from the fact that more States claim to be democratic now than ever before in human history, and we are firmly committed to seeing this trend expand. Slowly but surely, we are observing the globalization of democracy, and we dare to hope. Nevertheless, our challenges and political dilemmas are formidable. We need to globalize peace. We watch in awe as Israelis and Palestinians shake hands once again. The peace might be local, but our pride is international. Equally, when watching India and Pakistan, we dare to hope for non-proliferation. We cringe as pictures of war come out of Africa. We cannot hope for peace yet shut our eyes to war. We need to globalize human rights. Do we apply the same standards everywhere, from Kosovo and East Timor to Cyprus and Rwanda? We need to globalize our concept of rights pertaining to human beings. We understand multinationals that support human rights to protect their investments, but who will protect individuals who seek protection from the indignities of the world market? We need to globalize ethics. From Kosovo to East Timor we have bowed our heads, for we are still ill- equipped to deal with global ethical dilemmas such as those mentioned by the Secretary-General. Can human suffering be subordinated to sovereignty? Can we afford to be inconsistent in the application of military intervention? Is it right to impose trade sanctions on Governments that violate international rules, at the expense of their innocent populations? We seek to globalize values. Technological innovation is calling into question some of our most deeply felt beliefs. From cloning to brain transplants, scientists now face dilemmas that have global implications. We must make sure that fear does not inhibit scientific development, but also that curiosity does not inhibit civility. We need to globalize wealth. The growing gap between rich and poor countries has marginalized a large segment of the world's population and led to dangerous social problems, from illegal immigration to drug trafficking, terrorism, child labour and sexual exploitation. In an effort to contribute what little we can, Greece decided to increase its official development assistance by an annual How can we hope to face these challenges if the people of this world do not share a basic education and do not enjoy basic health? While the electronic media have minimized the restrictions of borders in the transfer of resources, wealth and information, democratic institutions and social policies remain confined within the borders of nations. We cannot wait for democracy to spread at this pace: we need a faster cure. We need to confront this global democratic deficit by supporting global democratic institutions. Beyond the globalization of democracy, I call for the democratization of globalism. This is a vision worthy of the United Nations. We seek a United Nations that is an active centre for peace and justice, a centre for the improvement of the life of each individual on this Earth. We expect a United Nations to respond to our needs for global ethics and global values. We believe in a strong United Nations that will act swiftly and effectively against those who wage war, harbour terrorism and destroy our planet. We aspire to a United Nations which will become the centre for democratic thinking and democratic practice throughout our world. May these United Nations, on our behalf, develop a culture of dialogue and a dialogue of cultures. For this is the essence of democratic politics: not a clash of different civilizations, but an educative dialogue that allows all to take part. We must educate each other to find peaceful and democratic ways to confront our challenges. This is a task for the United Nations. We yield to its authority as the only forum able to democratize the globalization process. We call for all Member States to provide the United Nations with the authority and the means to perform its duties. Greece will do so. As our Ghanaian colleague said yesterday, we continue to ask more of the United Nations, and yet we continue to endow it with fewer resources. We feel that following the important reforms of the Secretariat, the time has come to expand this Organization's authority, responsibility and budget. Do we dare allow this Organization to hope? In Greece we do. My country believes in strengthening the United Nations, but it also believes in doing its own work, on the ground, in the region. Uri Savir, the Israeli negotiator in Oslo, has said that peacemaking is a gradual revolution that moves from hostility to a desired conciliation, a Together with the International Olympic Committee, Greece has proposed the creation of such a moment — a global moment: we would like to see the revival of the ancient Greek tradition of the Olympic truce. We hope that this Assembly, which has unanimously endorsed that project, will give its full support to the observance of the Olympic truce during the games of the year 2000 in Sydney, Australia, in Athens in 2004 and at all future Olympics, so that the event may become a momentous festival of excellence, cross-cultural dialogue and peace in our global village. From Cyprus to Bosnia, a “collection of moments” is providing a ray of hope that, one day, a united Balkans and South-Eastern Europe will belong to a united Europe: a family of nations, a bouquet of cultures, a kaleidoscope of ethnicities, where diversity is our strength and where borders are so profoundly respected that they cease to exist. Can we dare see that far? Do we dare not to? We dare to hope. Turning first to Cyprus: following the declaration on Cyprus by the leaders of the Group of Eight and Security Council resolutions 1250 (1999) and 1251 (1999) of last June, there is hope that a new initiative may break the deadlock. Just as we envision a multicultural Balkans, we are striving to see Cyprus as a federal State with a single sovereignty and a single citizenship, a united, demilitarized, independent country with its territorial integrity safe from encroachments and with no foreign troops on its soil. The accession of Cyprus to the European Union would certainly benefit both communities living on the island. We invite the Turkish Cypriots, in the spirit of a newfound friendship between Greeks and Turks, to grab this historical opportunity. Let us break down the last “Berlin wall”, which artificially divides those two peoples. Let us show the world and our children that, yes, we can live together in peace and harmony with respect for human rights and democratic principles, within a wider European family. The tragic events in Kosovo will be remembered for acts of brutal ethnic cleansing and a military intervention that ensued without the authorization of the Security Council. Today, I encounter individuals who, under pressure to “close the case of the Balkans”, opt to redraw the maps, believing that ethnic isolation, constructing new walls and barriers between our peoples of the region, will solve our problems. But it can only compound our problems. But more important, we need a total Balkan approach. When I say “total”, I mean a coherent and consistent approach by the international community. The Balkans are badly served by mixed signals. Greece has drawn for itself a creative and effective role in the region. Greece supports all efforts to deepen democracy in the region. A total Balkan approach to democracy, security and reconstruction will pave the way for our neighbours to enter the European Union. Yugoslavia, of course, is also an integral part of this total Balkan approach. So too are Greece's bilateral and trilateral contacts of very close cooperation with Albania, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Bulgaria and Romania. We worked closely together during the recent Kosovo crisis for stability in the region and in providing humanitarian aid to Kosovo refugees. We believe that in our region there are no good or bad people, just good and bad practices. We have delivered and continue to deliver humanitarian assistance, as major humanitarian problems remain in many parts of Yugoslavia, and peacekeeping forces. We have conducted multilateral diplomacy, and we have promoted every effort that adheres to principles I have just stated without discrimination. Yes, in the total Balkan approach there is room for both the Albanian and the Serbian people. We ask them to dare to have a vision, the same vision: that, one by one, each Balkan country will become part of a united democratic Europe. Peoples' aspirations for the principles of democracy, security and prosperity can overcome historical strife. In this democratic spirit, we believe that our security is bound by the stability in the region; that our neighbours' strength is our own strength. From the outset, therefore, Greece shared with Turkey the vision that one day Turkey would become a worthy member of a united Europe. But we recognize today that our role needs to be to lead the process. The terrible earthquakes that shook both our countries have accelerated that process. Spontaneous and dramatic acts of fraternity and solidarity between our citizens short- circuited elaborate diplomatic strategies and exerted powerful pressure on our Governments to move ahead boldly. I for one shall never forget the sweat, the tears and the genuine expressions of solidarity and friendship shared by so many non-governmental organizations, and particularly by Greek and Turkish rescue workers from the Disaster Management Special Unit (EMAK) and the Turkish Search and Rescue Team (AKUT), sifting through the rubble of buildings destroyed by the earthquakes, looking for survivors. These people did not wait for us to act. Their actions globalize democracy, human solidarity and peace. That is one more lesson for democracy. International relations, humanitarianism, peace and cooperation have much to gain if we allow for citizens' diplomacy and give our full support to constructive roles for non-governmental organizations. Building on this unique experience, in our first joint act as members of this Organization, I join hands today with my Turkish counterpart, Ismail Cem. I join hands with him to announce to the Assembly the establishment of a joint stand-by disaster response unit composed of contingents drawn from governmental and non- governmental agencies of both countries, Greece and Turkey, to reinforce the United Nations capacity in this field. A comprehensive and methodical approach to dealing with natural disasters is in line with the recent statement by the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, that some major risk reduction and disaster prevention programmes require levels of funding that many poor countries simply cannot afford. In this Assembly, great visions founded on a strong sense of realism have helped to make the world more democratic, safer, and a little less painful for those in need. In Greece and south-east Europe, similar visions are helping to build democratic institutions, cement peace and pave the way to prosperity. There simply is no truth in the saying that we in the Balkans are trapped, that we have produced more history than we can consume and that we are prisoners of past conflicts and hatreds. History is not duress unless one makes it so. The challenge to every new generation of Greeks, and the challenge to our neighbours, is to learn from our history, and not to become slaves to it. We are building a new collective vision for the region, slowly but surely. We look forward to the day when Belgrade and Pristina will be an easy bus ride away, when Jerusalem and Damascus, Athens and Ankara and, of course, the two parts of divided Nicosia, will no longer be separated by fear and suspicion, but will be joined in peace. Perhaps that day is still far away but, as a Chinese proverb has it, a journey of a thousand miles begins with one small step. History is not compulsion unless one makes it so. The challenge to every new generation of Greeks, the challenge to our neighbours, is to learn from our history rather than become slaves to it. We are building a new collective vision for the region, slowly but surely. We look forward to the day when Belgrade and Pristina will be an easy bus ride away from each other, when Jerusalem and Damascus, Athens and Ankara and, of course, the two parts of divided Nicosia, will no longer be separated by fear and suspicion, but be joined in peace. Perhaps that day is still far away, but as a Chinese proverb has it, a journey of a thousand miles begins with one small step. This step we dared take this year. We dared to imagine the world at the end of a thousand miles. Rigas Fereos, a prominent Greek revolutionary, wrote in a constitution for the Balkans more than two centuries ago, Today, 100 days before the next millennium, we commit ourselves to keep walking in this direction of a new hope and vision for our world. As they say in Latin America, se hace camino al andar.

The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Denmark, His Excellency Mr. Niels Helveg Petersen, on whom I now call.

Let me first associate myself with the statement of my colleague, the Finnish Minister for Foreign Affairs, on behalf of the European Union. Let me also, Mr. President, congratulate you on your election. Denmark's relations with Namibia and with you personally go back to long before your country's independence. I am therefore particularly gratified to see you in this position. In my statement today, I should like to dwell upon the responsibility of the international community, including, of course, the United Nations, for human security and development. We live in an ever more globalized world. Almost every day we are confronted with new challenges that must be met. Distance or ignorance of events no longer provides a sense of security. Close international cooperation is needed to meet the challenges. But paradoxically, although the challenges are global, policy-making and institutions still remain predominantly national in focus and scope. Increasingly we see internal conflicts and blatant violations of human rights and humanitarian law pose a special and serious kind of threat. Terrorism, drug- trafficking and international crime also thrive in a globalized world. The international community must possess the means and display the resolve to confront such challenges. Our fundamental concerns about human security and human development cannot be met only in a domestic context. I should like to illustrate these concerns, first, in relation to the Kosovo and East Timor crises and, secondly, with regard to international development cooperation. The first point to be made is that the international community cannot be idle in the face of gross and systematic violations of human rights. Nor can we stand idly by if the United Nations and its representatives, who have assisted a people in exercising its right to self- determination, are trampled on. International law finds itself at a crossroads. We have spent the last 50 years developing an impressive body of human rights law, applicable in time of peace as well as during armed conflict, starting with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Indeed, there is no shortage of rules. What is lacking is effective implementation of existing rules, in the very last resort through the use of force. We must now aim at enforcement in order to provide assistance, regardless of frontiers, to the victims of human rights violations. We must show resolve in promoting respect for the rule of law and for the institutions called upon to uphold the rule of law. A broad spectrum of actions is available; the choice of action must depend on the problem we face. The thorny question is whether and when to use military force in the face of an emerging humanitarian catastrophe, such as a planned ethnic cleansing or downright genocide. It cannot be emphasized too often that a negotiated settlement must remain the primary and ultimate goal of any conflict solution. If, however, all attempts at securing a peaceful solution fail or are brushed aside, the question of whether to use force in one form or another arises. This brings the United Nations Security Council to the forefront. The Council has the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. It has carried out its functions as foreseen in the United Nations Charter in a much more effective and innovative way since the end of the cold war. I am referring, in particular, to the conflicts in relation to Iraq, Bosnia, Haiti, and Albania. A main challenge for the Security Council remains that of reacting effectively against gross and systematic violations of human rights conducted against an entire population. Unfortunately, the Council was not able to live up to its responsibilities concerning the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. Should the paralysis of the Council lead to blind acceptance? No; the international community could not stand idly by and watch, while the principle of State sovereignty was misused in Kosovo to violate international humanitarian law. In this serious situation the decision to launch the North Atlantic Treaty Organization campaign was legitimate and justified. It opened the way to a political solution, bringing the United Nations back into a central role. In East Timor we were faced with widespread, organized atrocities against a civilian population exercising its right to self-determination. In addition, the risk of total disregard for the United Nations was looming. Fortunately, the Security Council was not paralysed. Pressure from the international community brought about action. An agreement was reached to deploy a multinational force. We welcome this development. We urge the Indonesian Government to cooperate fully with the multinational force. In the meantime, the Indonesian Government remains responsible for the security of the population. It must make it possible for the humanitarian organizations to provide assistance for the large number of displaced persons in East Timor. We all share the responsibility for enabling the international community to address these issues and for enabling the United Nations to act. Where force has to be resorted to, we have to look to countries possessing that capability. In practical terms, this means that we often have to rely upon countries and organizations in the region. The Security Council must do its utmost to live up to its primary responsibility for the maintenance of peace, security and humanitarian decency — a primary The Council's permanent members should apply the veto only in matters of vital importance, taking into account their unique responsibility for the interests of the United Nations as a whole. And they should state on what grounds they consider such a situation to be present. The Secretary-General has said, “any armed intervention is itself a result of the failure of prevention”. (A/54/PV.4) I agree with the Secretary-General that conflict prevention and resolution must be given the highest possible priority in international relations. It should be carried out on the basis of a common resolve to secure human rights for all. The United Nations constitutes a needed and valuable tool to this end. Conflict resolution must, of course, not become only a question of the use of force. Let me point to two important aspects of the post-conflict situation. First, those who are responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity must be brought to justice. The creation of the ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda were important first steps towards establishing an effective international legal order based upon democratic values and the rule of law. The work of the tribunals has underlined the need for a permanent international criminal court designed to bring to justice those who have committed crimes of the most heinous kind. The prospects for lasting peace and reconciliation are severely undermined if war criminals and the like remain at large. The historic adoption last year in Rome of a statute for a permanent international criminal court is a landmark contribution to restoring the rule of law and ending impunity. Although not perfect, the Rome Statute provides a satisfactory basis for an effective and credible court. We urge all States to ratify the Statute as early as possible in order to put this historic building block in place. Denmark intends to ratify in the spring of the year 2000. Secondly, post-conflict assistance must be provided to the societies split by civil strife or war. Denmark is ready to do its part. With respect to the western Balkans, we initially provided assistance to refugees and for their safe return. Now we are gradually turning to assistance in The reconstruction of Kosovo is important. It includes the establishment of a well-functioning civil administration. The United Nations family and many non-governmental organizations are undertaking important tasks which deserve our full support. All parties must strive to heal the wounds of conflict. International relations and international cooperation are not based on a one-issue agenda. Certain issues may grab and almost monopolize the headlines for a while. In Europe we have to deal with the Balkans. But we must not neglect the other important issues on the international agenda, in particular international development cooperation and the struggle for the eradication of poverty. In a world where a third of the population of developing countries earns less than $1 per day, where 30 per cent of all children under five in those countries are underweight, where 14 per cent of the population will not attain the age of 40, where financial crisis has led to a major setback in poverty reduction — in such a world development cooperation must remain an integral part of the effort of the international community to promote and protect human security and human development. The international community must acknowledge its share of the responsibility for making the opportunities of globalization available to all. Globalization must not become identical with protected and selective prosperity. Eradication of poverty is an essential goal in its own right. Furthermore, poverty is an important cause of conflict. And again, violent conflict may undo the results of decades of development. Development cooperation, therefore, constitutes an effective crisis-prevention effort for the long term. International development cooperation must be based on the fulfilment as soon as possible of the agreed target of 0.7 per cent of gross domestic product for official development assistance and on implementing the decisions of the big United Nations conferences of recent years with regard to human and social development, eradication of poverty, sustainable development and gender equality. The follow-up conferences to the Beijing conference and, in the Denmark stands by these commitments. We will continue our policy of contributing 1 per cent of our gross national product to official development assistance. Poverty reduction is the prime goal of our development cooperation programmes. In addition, we are providing funding to help address global problems in the field of the environment as well as peacekeeping and conflict prevention. These grants will grow in the coming years, reaching half of 1 per cent of gross domestic product by the year 2005, thus bringing Denmark's total contribution to international assistance to 1.5 per cent of gross domestic product. Creating an enabling environment for development is a challenge, first of all for developing countries themselves. Reforms cannot be imposed from the outside. If they are to succeed, local ownership and local roots are essential. Official development assistance has an essential role to play in helping the poorest countries, particularly in Africa. Official development assistance also assists in building up the sectors that do not attract private investment: health, education, the social sectors and capacity-building in general. In this way, countries may also, eventually, become able to attract private investment and to avail themselves of the opportunities of international trade. In this context, it is deplorable to see official development assistance reaching its lowest point ever. Honouring the commitments of official development assistance entered into internationally by industrialized countries has become a question of credibility. It is also a question of the effectiveness of the multilateral system. The United Nations system cannot perform the tasks we ask of it if we deny it the necessary means. The downward trend of official development assistance must be reversed and a higher share should be multilateral. Many poor countries are crippled with debt hampering their development. We therefore welcome the proposals to improve the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Debt (HIPC) Initiative. We are, however, disappointed by the lack of progress in financing the Initiative. We appeal to the major donor countries to live up to their responsibilities following the debt declaration of the Cologne summit. Besides aid, not instead of aid, developing countries need trade. In the forthcoming new global trade round, The pursuit of human security and human development are not two independent paths. They are interrelated. Without economic and social development, it makes no sense to talk about human security. Where security does not exist, there will be no sustainable development. When violent conflict erupts, the results of decades of development may be undone in a very short time. We must uphold the importance of both concerns and we must emphasize that they are a national as well as an international responsibility. We thus face a major challenge at the threshold of the next millennium — a challenge we should give proper attention to at the Millennium Assembly next year.

I now call on the Minister of External Affairs of India, His Excellency Mr. Jaswant Singh.

It is a particular pleasure to see Mr. Gurirab presiding over the last session of the General Assembly of the twentieth century. I consider myself singularly fortunate and greatly honoured to be representing my country, India, on this occasion. I do believe that, in the many years that he spent here pursuing the dream of independence for his people — which, happily, is now a reality — he, more perhaps than others, has seen the United Nations at its best. That is why the perspective that he brings to the office of the President, enriched as it is by living through the very articles of faith of the United Nations, is near unique. I am sure we will all profit from it. I take this opportunity also to warmly welcome three new Members to the United Nations: Kiribati, Nauru and Tonga. I have no doubt their presence shall enrich our deliberations. Even as I address this Assembly, the century draws to a close and the world prepares to meet the year 2000. It is only appropriate and instructive, therefore, to look back and to reflect upon the journey that humanity set out upon 100 years ago. Where did we think we were then headed and where have we actually reached? Could any then foresee what 1999 would bring? Thus, are there, in the passage of the years that have gone by, any landmarks that could indicate a path for our future? For that, we need to assess the twentieth century, and there is but one yardstick by Indisputably, the twentieth has been the bloodiest of all centuries. But, in contradistinction, it has also been a century of the most profound transformations and of the most significant social, political and technological advancements. This, above all, has been the century of the ascendancy of the individual and of democracy. It is that period in which dynasties vanished and revolutions swept empires off the face of ancient lands. Centuries-old colonialism became history against the irresistible heave of the colonized to reclaim their lands, their souls, so that oppressed humanity could regain a voice, a say in its own political and economic destiny. It is the century in which we plumbed the depths of the oceans and soared into the infinities of space; when man first set foot on the moon, reached Mars and even deeper into the recesses of the unknown. In a wired-up world, the computer has today become what the fountain pen was in the early years of the twentieth century. The revolution of the digital has arrived. Humanity today is healthier, better fed and more sheltered than our forefathers were. But want and hunger, disease and deprivation are still widespread, including in developed societies. We have at our command more information than ever before, but are we that much wiser? Literacy has spread, but is mankind better educated? We are more connected globally, but are we as humankind? Have this linkage and interconnection reduced conflict and animosity? And thus, the tabulation of our assets and liabilities of this century flows. As we have improved upon and added to almost everything that we inherited in 1900, so most sadly have we to violence, too. This century has been the most bloodthirsty, perhaps because it is in these last 100 years that humanity has employed science to perfect means of killing as never before. Our passage has seen us move from the Gatling gun to a world menaced today by MIRVs. That early machine gun, the then-great mower down of the early 1900s, seems today almost a toy by comparison. We have split the atom, but employ the released energy less for peace and more for weapons of unimaginable destruction. Chemical defoliants and sophisticated biological weapons are also this century's contribution. The century that passes experienced not two, but three great wars. Each was a cataclysm, fought globally and at enormous cost. When the first ended, the survivors The United Nations could have been cast anew, made contemporary and democratized, drawing upon our collective experience to tackle new challenges with greater responsiveness. Can we, even now, do something at this last session of the General Assembly of this millennium to correct this? Can we pledge afresh to invest this institution with faith, commitment, political will and the resources that it needs to make it the vehicle capable of realizing the aspirations of all humanity, an instrument that will steer planet Earth into the next century? We do not enjoy an abundance of options. The sapping of the vitality or the diminishing of the centrality of the United Nations must not be permitted. We have but one Earth, and there is but one United Nations. Another development of this century, of crucial significance, is the transformation that we have experienced in the role of the State. From an agency that controlled and regulated all spheres of human activity, we move into a phase wherein the State must become more supportive, caring and encouraging of the citizen's individual and collective endeavours; it must release, not contain, the energies and genius of its people. It would be an error, however, to assume that the days of the State are over. The State continues to have a crucial role and relevance; also, therefore, do national sovereignties. The United Nations was not conceived as a super-State. It will not ever become so, principally because there is no viable substitute for the sovereign State. Even globalization can work only through State intermediaries. To diminish, marginalize or ignore the State would also be bad practice, because the weaker the State is rendered, the Globalization is an idea that has re-emerged, but also its reverse: fragmentation. The first is politico-economic, the second entirely political. Let us dwell a bit on this. Obviously, the technology that is driving this process can now scarcely be unlearned; the speed of travel and of communications will only increase; the age of the digital, as I said, has dawned. However, though globalization may apparently be driven by impersonal market forces, it is in reality impelled by power seeking political and financial advantage. It is, in essence, a political process, and if history teaches us anything, it is that such processes are not linear. Simply in terms of economic indicators, the world was as globalized at the turn of the century as it is now. A backlash followed: barriers went up, confrontation replaced cooperation and the world jostled into the tensions that led to the first great war. Are we, for the sake of temporary gain, perhaps even unwittingly, repeating yesterday's mistakes? Political hindsight tells us that globalization has to be politically directed for creating equal economic opportunity, both within States and among States. In India, we cherish the creative genius of the people. We believe that Indian excellence lies in the freedom of the individual. We do not subscribe to constricting choice through State impositions. But can free markets offer true freedom of choice to those that are not even a part of the market? That is why the State continues to have the responsibility to protect the needy, to strengthen the weak. That is a part of our democratic creed, too. We note that human rights have been made a cross- cutting theme of the work of the United Nations. That is important. The flowering, however, of human rights requires economic development and growth because many of the deprivations faced by individuals, whether in the developed or in the developing world, are rooted in marginalization created by poverty. We believe, therefore, that development should be the cross-cutting theme of the United Nations and that the multilateral development system, which has been one of its successes, must be strengthened, its focus narrowed to the core challenges of economic growth with social justice, and it must be given the resources it requires to respond to the needs of the developing countries. The international community will find that no investment yields better returns. We move with the challenges posed by globalization, without either retreating into a “fortress India” or abandoning our social objectives. We have worked out our own answers and devised our own policies to meet these new challenges because we hold that the sheer diversity of mankind dictates differences in approach, in human beings' respective search for relevant alternatives. This is a truth borne out by the fact that the twentieth century has been witness to the detritus of many false certainties. Today, when capital moves without almost any constraint, it is virtually impossible for developing countries to resist either its demands or manage the consequences of its sudden departure. Let us reflect upon the absence of order, system or any global oversight of currency flows, particularly short-term flows, even as we attempt to bring order and equity to trade in goods, services and commodities. But how are we to address the problem when currency, instead of being a vehicle of trade, has in itself become a commodity of trade, when the volume of trade in currency daily has outstripped global trade in goods and services or even global gross national product manifold? If globalization is to benefit all, and as we simply cannot accept that wheels of progress should grind down the common man, then surely some new international regulation, some order, is needed here. Let the United Nations take the initiative to hold an urgent international conference on financing for development. In the political domain, too, managing change demands openness and reasoned discourse, an essential ingredient of which is abjuring violence. That is why terrorism is the very antithesis of all that the United Nations represents and stands for. Terrorism is the great global menace of our age. In this age of democracy, it is a violation of the very basic precepts of it. Because its principal targets become the innocent, it is a crime against We also know how terrorism uses the international financial system, how it exploits the breakdown of countries and societies, and how it has preyed on the nexus between drugs and the proliferation of small arms. Thus, today, we witness a scimitar of narco-terrorism cutting across the Caucasus to the South Asian subcontinent. Two of the world’s largest sources of illicit drugs flank us. Terrorism financed by drugs has for years been the deadly export of our neighbours. Here the crippling intermixing of cause and effect is cruelly exemplified in Afghanistan. The world has been witness to the decades-old distress of the innocent men, women and children of that country. The disorders of Afghanistan, and the near anarchy into which that country has been pushed, are a consequence, chiefly, of the play of external forces and of a reversion to medieval fundamentalism of the most obscurantist variety. This disorder now overspills; it is also exported. It is not that human rights, particularly of women and children, are routinely violated there; they simply do not exist. Our relationships with this neighbour are ancient and rooted in a past that we share. That is why we urge this Assembly to be seized of the enormous human suffering of the Afghans, and to encourage and support the early formation of a Government truly representative of all sections of that society and country. Terrorism is a menace to which open societies are vulnerable; it becomes particularly difficult for democracies to counter when terrorists are armed, financed and backed by Governments or their agencies, and benefit from the protection of State power. Cross- border terrorism, sponsored from across our borders, has taken the lives of thousands of our citizens and ruined those of countless others. We will counter it, as we have done over the past decades, using the methods available to a democracy. India will defeat such forces. That is both our duty and our obligation to our citizens. Earlier this year India was subjected, yet again, to an act of premeditated aggression. In February this year, hoping yet again to set aside the sterility of relations of This act of faith was betrayed. Premeditated aggression by regular forces was committed against India. Not simply was the Lahore Declaration violated, but so was the Simla Agreement, which had prevented conflict for more than a quarter of a century. In self-defence, yet with the utmost restraint, India took all necessary and appropriate steps to evict the aggressor forces from its territory. Most regrettably, this aggression has set back the Lahore process of peace that we had initiated. For whereas aggression over territory can more easily be vacated, that territory of trust which has been transgressed is infinitely more difficult to restore. Permit me, Sir, to draw attention to the fact that this aggression upon India in Kargil was a demonstration of wanting to hold to ransom the world, through an act of aggression. It was also a manifestation of the larger disorders that the world has been witnessing in Afghanistan. There is an aspect that I stress. It was a gross violation of the Geneva Conventions when Indian soldiers taken prisoner were tortured, subjected to inhuman treatment and killed in captivity. These violations took place at a time when the international community has repeatedly been trying to establish the rule of law, stripping away the layers of impunity that have protected those who give the orders that lead to violations of international humanitarian law. And it is thus that I find it necessary to reiterate some essential verities of Indian nationhood. From the earliest days of our struggle against imperialism and colonial rule it has been an unquestionable article of faith with us that India is one nation: a nation of many faiths, a diversity of beliefs, a cultural harmony arranged through the interplay of myriad forms and manifestations, but a unity, strengthened by its pluralism, that is beyond question. And of this is born India’s democratic vitality, too. Also of this oneness and unity, the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part, and shall remain so. Because this is not any territorial dispute; it is the assertion of two antipodal approaches to national identity. India has never represented denominational nationhood; it is civic nationalism to which Yet the path of the India-Pakistan composite dialogue process is open. No preconditions attend it. The only essential ingredient that remains is an abjuring of violence and cross-border terrorism, principles that are integral to both the Simla Agreement and the Lahore Declaration — indeed, the very process of peace itself. This process needs to be resumed. We have been greatly disappointed by this compulsive hostility of Pakistan, because it is an aberration in our region today, where all the other South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) countries are at peace with each other, and are trying, bilaterally and through the SAARC mechanisms, to tackle together the great challenge of development. But we remain unshaken in our vision of cooperation and shared prosperity of the South Asian region, as embedded in the Charter of SAARC, as well as in our faith in the ability, talent and will of the people of the region to take their rightful place in the world community. The destiny of all our peoples is linked. It is a region with a collective history reaching back to the beginnings of human history and of the highest civilizational accomplishments. In striving to attain the promise of the future in our region, we also see the recovery of a great past. This is perhaps the right juncture at which to say a few words about pluralism in an age of globalization. Though we find sterile the debate over universal and regional values, extreme positions are still taken on both sides. In a spirit of engagement, we would urge our partners in the West to be a bit more tolerant, and a bit more introspective. While all democratic Governments try to promote good governance, human rights and social responsibility, the perspective they approach them from, and their ability to implement them, vary. Rigidly applying, as a universal paradigm, value systems that reflect the state of western economies and societies in the late twentieth century, produces an inevitable reaction, which does not make either for dialogue or constructive decisions. Globalization has also influenced our thinking on security issues by generating a greater awareness about new security concerns. Equally important, with the end of the cold war there is a growing realization that peace cannot be maintained through balance of power or hegemonic order. To maintain global peace and security, Global nuclear disarmament was the objective set out by the 1946 General Assembly in the first resolution that it adopted. That objective still beckons us. I say this as the representative of a country that has been obliged to acquire nuclear weapons because of the failure of the existing non-proliferation regime to address our primary security concerns. Yet let me also state with full conviction that India’s commitment to global nuclear disarmament stands undiluted. India is the only nuclear- weapon State ready to negotiate a nuclear weapons convention that will prohibit for ever the development, production, stockpiling, use and threat of use of nuclear weapons and provide for the elimination of all existing weapons under international verification. If this can only be a step-by-step process, the first step at a technical level is for all countries possessing nuclear weapons to take measures that will reduce the dangers of, and provide added safeguards against, any unintended or accidental use. Coupled with this is the political step of reorienting nuclear doctrines, towards no-first-use, and then non-use, thus delegitimizing nuclear weapons globally. Independent expert opinion across the globe has spoken strongly in favour of such measures. In fact, every single study that has been published since the end of the cold war on the measures to achieve a nuclear-weapon-free world has highlighted the need for shifting to doctrines based on no-first-use and non-use, and technical measures towards de-alerting, as the inevitable first steps in the process. We have taken initiatives to urge the international community forward on both counts, and hope that in this General Assembly session the Indian initiatives will receive the unanimous support that they merit. Last year my Prime Minister declared in this Assembly that India was engaged in discussions on a range of issues, including the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). These discussions are in process and will be resumed by the newly- elected Government of my country. Our position remains consistent. We remain ready to bring these discussions to a successful conclusion. Naturally, this requires the creation of a positive environment as we work towards creating the widest possible consensus domestically. We also expect that other countries will adhere to this Treaty without any conditions. So, at the end of this centennial audit, what is it that we would want the United Nations to do in the first few years? It is clear that there are two major problems facing the United Nations as an institution: Security Council reform and the United Nations financial crisis. These need to be addressed. The Security Council must be made more representative, with developing countries inducted as permanent members, to reflect the changes in the United Nations membership and today’s political realities. As we said earlier, on any objective criteria, India’s credentials for permanent membership are persuasive. Sustainable and environmentally sound development is a goal to which India continues to attach the utmost importance. In 2002 we will complete a decade of Agenda 21, adopted at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. I trust that the current session of the General Assembly will put in place a preparatory process for the “Rio + 10” review. This will enable the Member States to take stock of the implementation of the commitments undertaken by the Member States in Agenda 21 over the past decade. Such a process is vital for attaining our common goal of sustainable and environmentally sound development. This century has shown us that our challenges are common; they are intertwined. Problems flow across boundaries, they batten on each other. Political, security, economic and social challenges are braided around each other; when they form a knot, that has to be cut by all of us together. Here, and nowhere else, can we do this. It is convenient to look at security issues in the First Committee, at economic issues in the Second, at human rights and social issues in the Third, and so on, but we often do not see them together, and so fail to use the United Nations as we should. May I, in conclusion, therefore, propose that in the next decade the United Nations endeavour to address the most urgent problems that face us today. We have to do this as a unity of nations, as also of issues, for it is evident that solutions in one field will depend on, or be I leave you with a sloka from the Rigveda. Though written 5,000 years ago, it reaches across time to us as at this session of the General Assembly, in the last year of the twentieth century. In translation, it reads, “Be of one heart, one mind and free of hate. Let your aim be common, your assembly common, United your mind and thoughts; May you make your resolutions with one mind, Perform your duties righteously. Let our hearts be together”.

I now call on the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan, His Excellency Mr. Boris Shikhmuradov.

First of all, permit me to congratulate the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Namibia, Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly. I would also like to express words of gratitude to Mr. Didier Opertti Badán for his dynamic and competent work during the entire course of the preceding session. For the United Nations, last year — if it were measured by the magnitude of military and political upheavals — would be equal to a calendar year that thrust upon mankind natural calamities that had catastrophic effects on people. In many respects it was a year from which we had to draw lessons. It made us ponder seriously the political survival of States and the physical protection of people. It made us take a fresh look at the system of international relations, which was helpless in the face of the new challenges of the times. Nowadays we can no longer write everything off as costs of the cold war. That is why we have paid special attention to the part of the Secretary-General’s report in which he tried to give a analysis of present-day conflicts. Those conflicts, because of the nature of their origins and the dynamics of their evolution, did not always yield to traditional forms and This is the eighth time that Turkmenistan has taken part in a session of the General Assembly as an independent subject of international relations. Without the active support of our friends, it would be hard to imagine the state of Turkmenistan’s development today, which allows us to look with optimism at the future and to establish long-term programmes of social and economic development. In this regard, we are grateful to our close neighbours — Iran, Russia, Turkey, Pakistan, China and India — and our partners in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. From a conceptual point of view, the system of Turkmenistan’s international relations is based on sincerity and reciprocity of mutual interests, neutrality and non-alignment, which form the two pillars of our statehood. I would like to avail myself of this opportunity to express words of gratitude to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and to emphasize its large-scale activities, which merit all-round support. The Government of Turkmenistan, together with UNDP, has undertaken a number of major national projects that have yielded concrete results in the reforms of the social sphere, public health, the system of education and other areas. Turkmenistan intends to continue to maintain close ties with that important agency of the United Nations, with the aim of identifying and implementing new opportunities for cooperation. In view of the major development tasks lying ahead, UNDP personifies for us the United Nations system as a whole. Purposeful cooperation between specialized agencies of the United Nations and national Governments makes it possible to identify the main parameters of the conflict- prevention strategy in each individual region. Ever- increasing flows of refugees and displaced persons to In close relation to the above subject, I would like to draw attention to the situation in Afghanistan, which continues to cause serious concern. Historically, Turkmenistan had close fraternal ties with that long- suffering nation. Hence, we have a sincere interest in the re-establishment of peace and the restoration of Afghanistan. Since the first days of independence, Turkmenistan built its relations with Afghanistan on the basis of mutual trust and respect. Our position is absolutely transparent and clear: neutrality with respect to the parties to the conflict; a constructive attitude towards and a due accounting of the realities of today’s Afghanistan; a desire to engage conflicting parties in a dialogue; and creative economic reconstruction programmes. It is precisely this desire that underpinned our initiative of holding two rounds of direct inter-Afghan talks in Ashgabat early this year, which were supported by the two key factions and bore fruit, giving hope for the future. However, in our opinion, this process did not receive adequate support from the outside, from those who are more prone to making declarations of good intentions and advancing their own interests rather than taking practical steps to help the Afghan people. Turkmenistan has been working on the Afghan issue and will continue to work on it under any format of international cooperation, including the mechanism of the “six plus two” group under the auspices of the United Nations, as that mechanism possesses an enormous untapped potential. We all have grounds to raise this issue because we have actually encountered a situation that may not be the best one for the United Nations, which has financed a Special Mission in Afghanistan — a Mission that until now has failed to produce any practical results. Smoothly written reports should not substitute for real political work in the field. We share a commonly held view that the United Nations system needs rational reform in the twenty-first century. The Millennium Assembly, on the theme of the United Nations in the twenty-first century, will become a major landmark in this process, and Turkmenistan wholeheartedly supports the idea of holding such a session. That Assembly could provide a unique opportunity to Statements by heads of delegations at the current session contain many ideas regarding the need to reform the United Nations and the Security Council and to balance the right of veto, among many others. Turkmenistan adheres to the view that while seeking to improve the situation, the most important thing is to take a well-considered and balanced approach to the solution of the issues concerning the destiny of the Organization, rather than cause it harm by becoming hostage to emotions. It is our opinion that while encountering some glitches in the work of the mechanism, we should not rush into its complete replacement but should try to properly diagnose the weakness in the available resources. It may be a case of the problem not being in the system itself, but rather in those who are called to represent it at various levels. Turning once again to the problem of the elaboration and implementation of a system to prevent conflicts and ensure safe development, I would like to emphasize that the foreign policy course of neutrality pursued from the outset by Turkmenistan has always been aimed at precisely this goal. It is explicitly mentioned in the Secretary-General’s report that the struggle for control over economic resources is one of the main causes of conflicts. Therefore the implementation of the foreign policy initiative concerning Turkmenistan’s permanent neutrality, in the form of a special resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 12 December 1995, has a very important meaning in this regard. The development of the extremely rich hydrocarbon resources of the Caspian basin is tied to the interests not only of regional countries but also to those of major Powers and transnational companies. Turkmenistan’s neutrality is aimed at a situation of combined rather than conflicting interests. We believe that in today’s world there can, and should, exist zones of interest, but we resolutely oppose the concept of spheres of influence. The issue concerning the status of the Caspian Sea is highly relevant in this respect. We have on numerous occasions stated our position on this issue: we would like to prevent the work on the status of the Caspian Sea from turning from an international law problem into a political problem. In any case, we consider it appropriate at this forum to draw attention to this issue, so that we can avoid the politicization of issues concerning the legal definition and development of the energy resources of the sea and The highly complex nature of the tasks facing States Members of the United Nations is clear. The momentous challenges confronting the Organization are commensurate with the hopes of people around the globe, who believe that real change for the better will take place with the change of epochs. This concerns both large and small nations, the rich and the poor, newly independent and long-existing States. We all face challenges that can be overcome only by means of collective efforts, recognizing at the same time individual responsibilities. Such is the logic of Turkmenistan’s political behaviour and its readiness to be an active Member of the Organization.

I now call on the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, Mr. Jan Kavan.

By way of introduction, let me congratulate you, Sir, on your election as President of the fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly and wish you every success in the execution of your important functions. I would like to use this opportunity also to express thanks to your predecessor, Mr. Didier Opertti of Uruguay, for his responsible work and for the efforts he has devoted to United Nations activities throughout the year. The Czech Republic is very pleased that after five years the Assembly again has an opportunity to welcome new United Nations Members — Nauru, Kiribati and Tonga. This further expansion of the United Nations family is evidence of its increasingly universal nature, which the Czech Republic unequivocally supports. This year marks an important milestone for the Czech Republic, which this past spring became a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), together with Hungary and Poland. Recalling Article 1 of the Washington Treaty, which refers to the United Nations Charter and commits its members to address international conflicts by peaceful means, we believe that this historic first enlargement of the Alliance following the end of the cold war will contribute to the enhancement of stability and security, and do so not only in our region. We support NATO’s continued enlargement through the inclusion of other countries, and we are convinced that this first step will also have a motivating and mobilizing character for them. Because development in Europe is profoundly influenced by ever-deeper integration, the successful completion of the long-term process of our country’s entry into the European Union is currently the highest- priority goal for Czech foreign policy. Having started accession talks in the spring of last year, the Czech Republic is promoting political dialogue with the European Union member States and associated countries. Through our active involvement in the Common Foreign and Security Policy, we are assuming our share of responsibility for development in Europe and the world, obviously, to date, within the restrictive framework of our status as an associated country. We attach major importance to the social and environmental dimensions of European integration. We are fully aware that the importance of these dimensions will continue to increase in order to keep up with the advancement of globalization. The disintegration of the bipolar world has brought about a transition from confrontation to cooperation given rise to efforts to create a new security architecture, and led to integration processes, particularly on the European continent. However, it has also brought about the resurgence of dormant threats and the emergence of new centres of instability. The Kosovo tragedy and other crises have brought us closer to recognizing the importance of the principle of the personal security of human beings and its guarantees as a precondition of peace and security in the world. The fact that the worst atrocities, which have nothing in common with the civilized world, are still The United Kingdom’s Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Robin Cook, correctly argued here that we must counter the culture of impunity. All criminals should be held to account. As Secretary- General Kofi Annan said, massive and systematic violations of human rights should not be allowed to stand, wherever they may take place. Kosovo will be the benchmark for the success achieved by international institutions. Kosovo is now in a period when it is necessary to defend peace, a period in which to achieve political stability and democratization, economic stabilization and a gradual development of the region. The Czech Republic is interested in the region’s stability in all respects. That is why it participated, in its capacity as the currently presiding country of the Central European Initiative, in the Stability Pact Summit meeting at Sarajevo and why it will be working towards democratization, economic reconstruction and security in the region. We are, of course, fully aware that this is far easier said than done. The obstacles on the road are numerous and enormous. The United Nations plays an irreplaceable role in providing for international peace and security. The peaceful resolution of disputes will undoubtedly continue to be one of the main priorities of the United Nations. The Czech Republic therefore attaches great importance to the use of peacekeeping operations in dealing with crisis situations and supports the efforts directed towards their greater efficiency, particularly as regards their rapid deployment. Speed appears to be the key aspect in many cases. However, the United Nations must also have adequate funding to carry out this demanding role effectively; unfortunately, its financial resources are considerably limited at present because of the fact that some Member States fail to honour their financial obligations. The United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) has been marked by these problems: the Mission was not financially secured to the degree which would have corresponded with the security situation at hand and with the very difficult task of restoring the civil administration in Kosovo. On the other hand, it was probably the most rapidly deployed mission in the history of the United Nations. A major degree of responsibility lies on the shoulders of the United Nations, and especially on those of the Secretary-General’s Special Representative, Mr. Bernard Kouchner, in Kosovo. I had an opportunity to get to know his difficult task at first hand during my visit to Pristina a few days ago. The Secretary-General’s Special Representative needs the full support of the international community in his efforts, including the transformation of the UCK into a non-military Kosovo protection corps. The Czech Republic obviously supports all steps and measures which may bring about the establishment of a democratic and multi-ethnic society in Kosovo as stipulated by the Washington North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Summit. Unfortunately, during my stay in Kosovo I did not come across any convincing evidence that that vision could really be implemented in any foreseeable future — just the contrary. The diminishing number of Serbs in Kosovo, the continuous threats of murder — even to very old Serbian ladies — the rising influence of a mafia, which Mr. Kouchner told me about, the ever-present spirit of revenge, the lack of trained police forces, the absence of local civil administration, the disease of corruption and rivalry between different sectors of the Kosovo Albanians are just some of the obstacles which have to be dealt with decisively in order to prevent the vision of the future from becoming nothing but a never-fulfilled dream. I wholeheartedly agree with the Secretary-General’s unequivocal statement that commitment to humanitarian action must be universal if it is to be legitimate. This means not only that our commitment to peace and stability cannot end with the cessation of hostilities but that we have to be seen to be objective and even-handed towards all ethnic groups, as well as towards all regions. I am glad to note that the recent argument that “East Timor is not Kosovo” was quietly dropped. The Secretary-General has said that humanity, after all, is indivisible; we have to wholeheartedly agree with him. The Czech Republic intends to continue its involvement in peace operations under the leadership of The Czech Republic is concerned about the developments in East Timor. We welcome the fact that after decades, the people of East Timor were given an opportunity to implement their right to self-determination, and we feel very shocked that the results of the referendum led to bloodshed and indiscriminate killings. Indonesia’s acceptance of the United Nations military peacekeeping forces has made us confident that the United Nations will succeed in ensuring peace in that area. Peace and security in crisis-ridden areas are also closely related to humanitarian relief, which is provided as a rule to afflicted civilian populations. A radical deterioration in the security situation may cause a devastating humanitarian crisis, as we have seen in Kosovo. Here, too, there is a need to look at the possibilities of simplifying the United Nations decision-making mechanisms. It is disturbing that, for example, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees did not have sufficient resources and capacities to tackle the humanitarian crisis in that region, which was due mainly to somewhat rigid procedures. One of the most important tasks of the international community is undoubtedly to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and to eliminate them completely. Our aim is still a world without any nuclear weapons. With regard to the forthcoming Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to be held in the year 2000, the Czech Republic calls for overcoming the stagnation in negotiations on the relevant treaties supporting the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and for developing more positive attitudes, particularly on the part of nuclear There is no question but that early ratification of the START II Treaty between the United States and Russia would help considerably to revive the disarmament process. We consider the achievement of universal applicability of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) and their speedy ratification a very urgent task. In this respect, we particularly appreciate the CTBT ratification by France and by the United Kingdom. The Czech Republic hopes that the conference of CTBT countries, to be held at Vienna in October this year, will help to accelerate ratification in other countries. We welcome efforts to improve the effectiveness of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and we continue to express our support for early negotiation of a verification protocol to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction. Regarding conventional arms, the Czech Republic supports all measures that contribute to greater transparency. It consistently fulfils its obligations to notify the relevant registers and supports the efforts for an expansion of their procedures which would cover additional types of weapons. The Czech Republic also fully shares the international community’s grave concern over illegal transfers of hand-held and light weapons, and supports all measures required to stop such activities. In the context of the international efforts to limit and ban the use of anti-personnel landmines, I can inform the Assembly with satisfaction that, following last year’s ratification of Protocol II to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, the Czech Republic has completed the process of ratifying the Ottawa Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on Their Destruction and will soon deposit our ratification instrument with the Secretary-General. We support all efforts towards achieving universal applicability of that Convention. We continue to be involved in international activities focused on demining and on providing help to landmine victims. There is no doubt that this year has been a real test for the United Nations, as well as a critical test of transnational decision-making during crises. This test, so crucial for the future of the United Nations, has not yet been concluded and properly evaluated. It is not only Kosovo that has revealed that the United Nations in its present form does not make full use of its potential to be an irreplaceable vehicle for achieving the goals set out in the Charter. At the threshold of the third millennium, the Organization therefore looks for an answer to the question of how the international community can become a truly responsible community and what role the United Nations will play in this process. In our view, the United Nations must first of all respond to the changed substance of conflicts in today’s world. These are not classical conflicts between States but, in most cases, internal conflicts rather similar to civil wars. The United Nations and the international community in general face the need to clearly define the relationship between national sovereignty and the protection of human rights and ultimately to engage in a discussion on how they should support sensible civilian Governments that keep armed forces under control. In this context, we should clearly focus on the Secretary-General’s argument about individual sovereignty and the right of every individual to control his or her own destiny. Secondly, the urgency of a radical acceleration of the process of United Nations reform, particularly reform of the Security Council, is becoming increasingly evident. The Czech Republic fully supports the Secretary-General’s reform efforts, and I would like to share the optimism concerning early substantial progress in reform negotiations which Mr. Annan expressed to me during our talks in Prague last July. I have to admit that we consider the results of this year’s negotiations, especially those on Security Council reform, to be inadequate. This, of course, corresponds to the role of the United Nations during the initial stages of the Kosovo conflict. The composition of the Security Council requires change. The Czech Republic Thirdly, conflict-prevention mechanisms need to be created, and attention should be devoted to questions such as discrimination, poverty, access to raw materials and the arms trade. The arms trade does not include only extensive, elaborate weapons systems. It is the excessive accumulation of hand-held and other small arms which above all requires our tough response, because these personal weapons play a key role in most conflicts. I would like to express my full support for the call by the United Kingdom Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, to halt the illegal trade in small arms. Cooperation with regional organizations such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Organization of African Unity, which may be more successful in dealing with conflicts, should also play a role in preventing conflicts. I very much welcome the Secretary-General’s emphasis here on moving from a culture of reaction to a culture of prevention. Fourthly, the role of the United Nations in the area of human rights and as part of a broader concept of human security should be considerably intensified. We welcomed the Secretary-General’s personal statement in his address at this year’s session of the Commission on Human Rights, in which he said, “I have made human rights a priority in every United Nations programme”. This, it seems to me, accurately reflects the importance which the United Nations should give human rights issues in the future. The United Nations should ensure that the universal nature of human rights is accepted and projected as a leading principle for the conduct of the international community. By our joint efforts we should guarantee a dignified and complete life for every individual in the next millennium. It is unacceptable at the threshold of the new millennium to claim that human rights are relative and that their violation by sovereign States on their own territory is solely their internal affair and as such may not be a subject of interest to other members of the international community. If the United Nations were unable publicly to defend the existence of human rights, it would be unable to defend its own existence. At the same time, let us not forget the Secretary- General’s warning about the need to ensure universal legitimacy, which he issued in connection with the bombing campaign against Yugoslavia. Incidentally, the new Czech Government has adopted a foreign policy Fifthly, it is in the vital interest of the United Nations for the world to step into the twenty-first century under the rule of law in international relations. The situation in the former Yugoslavia, including developments in Kosovo, clearly shows the extremely important role already played today by international judicial bodies in enhancing the prestige of international law and its gradual integration into the political decision-making processes. The implementation of international law by the United Nations international judicial bodies has considerable positive influence on how global public opinion perceives the United Nations itself. Let me now touch briefly on one more serious problem. Recent earthquakes in Turkey, Greece and Taiwan have underlined the need for the world to be prepared to provide coordinated help to an area hit by a massive natural disaster. This experience should, in our view, lead to the further strengthening and deepening of the idea already presented some time ago, namely, the idea of the “White Helmets”. The challenge is to extend “White Helmets“ into regular international rescue forces under United Nations leadership, capable of coordinated action on the spot — naturally, with the consent of the countries receiving such assistance. The ultimate goal could be the formation of rapid- response international forces, formed of national contingents and permanently available, well-equipped expert groups which could be dispatched to the stricken area in a matter of minutes or hours. In conclusion, let us remind ourselves once again that the future of the United Nations is primarily a matter of the political will of its Member States. Finding answers to the questions which have been raised at this year’s session of the General Assembly is therefore not only up to the United Nations, but up to the entire international community. The Millennium Assembly should give us a major opportunity for finding answers to these questions. I also hope that the Millennium Assembly will contribute decisively to the acceleration of work on the United Nations reforms, the need for which was so clearly highlighted by the Kosovo crisis. I am sure that the recovery of the commitment to multilateralism and to the leading United Nations role in the struggle to uphold basic Charter values, such as democracy, human rights and the rule of law, is now in sight. My traditionally cautious optimism was, I admit, slightly strengthened in this respect by listening here to some politicians representing countries with far more

I call on the representative of Pakistan, who wishes to speak in exercise of the right of reply. May I remind delegations that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and 5 minutes for the second intervention and should be made by delegations from their seats. Mr. Haque: I am taking the floor to respond to the statement made by the Foreign Minister of India earlier this evening, wherein he accused Pakistan of compulsive hostility towards his country. This statement is as disingenuous as it is hypocritical. In the light of history, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to be misled by Indian protestations of its pious intentions towards its neighbours. Since its independence, Indian ambitions in the region and beyond, its proclivity for resorting to the use of force and its hegemonic and expansionist policies have been amply demonstrated on numerous occasions. To recap briefly, since its independence, India has occupied a number of territories by the use of force. I refer to the territories of Hyderabad, Junagadh, the Portugese territories of Goa, the Kingdom of Sikkim, Jammu and Kashmir and India’s repeated aggression and imposed wars against Pakistan. Indian ambitions have also impelled it to acquire nuclear weapons, thus plunging South Asia into a nuclear arms race. Pakistan’s compulsion is to defend itself, to defend its sovereignty, to defend its territorial integrity and to defend its independence, since Pakistan has suffered the brunt of Indian aggression and has once been dismembered as a result of that aggression. The Foreign Minister of India also referred to Jammu and Kashmir as the very core of Indian nationhood. If this indeed is the core of Indian nationhood, it must be a rotten core, because this core is built on the denial of the right of self-determination of the Most of the nations represented in this body have acquired nationhood and independence as a result of the exercise of this inalienable right. No core of nationhood can be built on the denial of this basic right. If Jammu and Kashmir is the core of Indian nationhood, it is built on the violation and open flouting of the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council — incidentally, the very body in which India aspires to achieve a permanent seat — as well as of international law and morality. If this is the core of Indian nationhood, it is built on massive repression, on murder, on arson, on the rape of women — since in Jammu and Kashmir in the last decade alone more than 60,000 innocent people have been murdered, thousands of women have been raped, entire villages have been burnt to the ground. No nation can pride itself on having a core that is based on these despicable actions. If this is indeed the core of Indian nationhood, the less said about it the better. The facts of the Jammu and Kashmir situation are that Jammu and Kashmir is not a part of India and never has been a part of India. There are Security Council resolutions pledging to the Kashmiri people their right to self- determination. These were accepted by India. The people of Jammu and Kashmir have boycotted the most recent elections and earlier elections, the sham elections held by India. They have not participated in those elections in order to show their alienation and rejection of Indian rule. There are more than 700,000 Indian soldiers and paramilitary forces engaged in efforts to quell the struggle of the Kashmiri people and to break their spirit through massive violations of their human rights, murders, atrocities, repression, custodial deaths and the destruction of Kashmir’s economy. All this has been documented by international human rights organizations, such as Asia Watch, Amnesty International and a host of others, including some within India itself. The Foreign Minister of India also referred to Kargil. Kargil was a manifestation of the continuing struggle of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to achieve their right to self- determination. Until such time as the Kashmiri people achieve their right to self-determination, their struggle will continue. In the face of these false Indian accusations, we have now resorted to the practice of inviting International Committee of the Red Cross personnel to observe the handing over of any Indian soldiers who are imprisoned by Pakistan or captured by Pakistan when they cross over into our territory. The Foreign Minister of India also talked about international terrorism. It is odd that he should have done so since it is India that has written the book on the practice of State-sponsored terrorism. India’s State- sponsored terrorism against the Kashmiri people is well documented. India’s State-sponsored terrorism against Pakistan has resulted in the deaths of thousands of people, in random violence — all in an effort to break the spirit of the people, to sow divisions among them. And we have confessions of hundreds of Indian agents attesting to this fact. Pious sentiments about democracy and pluralism do not mean anything unless they are put into practice. India is a country that talks of peace and builds nuclear arsenals. India is a country that talks of peace at the United Nations while it makes unremitting war on the innocent people of Jammu and Kashmir for having dared to ask for their right to self-determination. We call upon India to take the first step on this path by ending its repression in Kashmir and entering into a dialogue with Pakistan, to find a just solution to the Jammu and Kashmir problem in accordance with the wishes of its people, as well as to all other outstanding issues between our countries.