S/PV.3465 Security Council

I should like to inform the Council that I have received a letter from the representative of El Salvador in which he requests to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council’s agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite that representative to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure. There being no objection, it is so decided.

The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. The Security Council is meeting in accordance with the understanding reached in its prior consultations. Members of the Council have before them the report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador, documents S/1994/1212 and S/1994/1212/Add.1. Members of the Council also have before them document S/1994/1332, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by Colombia, Mexico, Spain, Venezuela and the United States of America. I should like to draw the attention of the members of the Council to the following other documents: S/1994/989 and S/1994/1144, letters dated 11 August 1994 and 6 October 1994 respectively from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the Security Council. The first speaker is the representative of El Salvador, on whom I now call. At the outset, we wish to express our gratitude for this opportunity to share with members some thoughts and ideas on the peace process in Central America, particularly in El Salvador, and on the valuable participation of the United Nations in the search for such a desirable goal, especially as the Council is about to take one of the final decisions on a mechanism that has been extremely important in the verification of that process. The United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL) was created to observe and verify all political agreements between the Government of El Salvador and the FMLN until such time as its mandate expired with the full political, economic, social and institutional democratization of the country. In making this statement, I hope for the understanding and patience of the members of the Security Council if I take more time than is customary. We believe, however, that this issue has deep historical significance, not only for El Salvador but also for Central America and the United Nations. It must therefore be addressed in its entirety and as the principal participants we must bear witness to it. In speaking of the future of the peace process in El Salvador, of the consolidation of democracy, and of reconciliation and national development with a human face, we must recall the past and take into account the realities of the present with respect to our resources, capabilities and limitations in fulfilling our goals and objectives at the national, regional and international levels. The political, economic and social crisis in El Salvador is not very different from that of other developing countries when considered in relative proportion, but we must take into account the specific differences that emerge as factors of place and historical moment. In considering the magnitude of the crisis experienced in El Salvador, we must look at the past. The crisis was not born out of thin air; its origins and evolution were the results of longstanding and profound social, political, economic and cultural imbalances. One negative aspect of our national life was the scarcity of forums and mechanisms for exercising ideological To be precise, on 15 October 1979, a coup d’état took place which at first was claimed to correct the failings of the past. Instead, we experienced an institutional breakdown and the emergence of a struggle between the forces of change and the maintenance of the status quo by force of arms. Unfortunately, this produced an armed conflict that lasted over 10 years. We must also recognize that, aside from the general violence throughout the country, there began a process that led to a greater understanding of the depth of the crisis and its causes and its effects on Salvadorian society. This opened up opportunities for dialogue and negotiation among the conflicting forces. From 1979 to 1992, El Salvador suffered a civil armed conflict. Its development was compounded by outside factors that internationalized it and modified its scope and dimensions, given the close relationship between the Central American countries. The crisis must therefore be analysed not only from a national perspective but also in the broader context of the Central American crisis. At the regional level, the difficult and complex situation between the Central American countries was affected by the eruption of the Sandinista revolution, its close ties to the socialist countries and its attempt to establish in Nicaragua an ideological, political and economic system at variance with those of other Central American societies. It was also affected by the Sandinista movement’s support of revolutionary movements in other Central American countries. Outside the region, the Central American and Salvadorian crisis grew from national and regional roots to become yet another scenario of the cold war, especially once external interests became involved and turned Central America into a prize in the struggle for supremacy between Power blocs at the international level, whose concern was to maintain or expand their respective areas of influence in total disregard for the deepening economic crisis and the The deterioration of the armed conflict in El Salvador and the increased tensions between our Governments, which in turn exacerbated regional instability, for the first time brought Central America into the international arena. This was of serious concern to the world community, since it could have led to a generalized conflict threatening international peace and security. This situation gave rise to internal and external initiatives and efforts to bring to an end, through dialogue and negotiation, the conflicts in the region. First steps in the quest for peace were taken by the Governments of Nicaragua and El Salvador between 1980 and 1987, and in 1983 efforts were begun by the Contadora Group, later supplemented by the Support Group. These Groups considered that a firm and lasting peace in the region could be achieved only if the fundamental causes of the conflict were addressed, a perception that was embodied in the initiative known as the draft Contadora Act of 6 June 1986 for Peace and Cooperation in Central America. Those efforts deserve our recognition. They led to what was to become the basic accord between the Central American Governments in their quest for peace, the “Procedures for the establishment of a firm and lasting peace in Central America”, better known as the Esquipulas II Agreements, adopted at Guatemala City on 7 August 1987. In those Agreements the Central American Presidents undertook to assume their responsibilities in the quest for peace and the elimination of war, as recognized in the Final Communiqué of the meeting of Central American Foreign Ministers and the Contadora Group, held on 1 August 1987, in which they reiterated that it was basically up to the Central Americans themselves to search for and arrive at those solutions. They also reiterated the existing commitments to be fulfilled to realize those goals and to initiate a process of national reconciliation and reconstruction as a precondition to promoting democracy and development in an environment of full respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, in keeping with the aspirations of the peoples of Central America. It was agreed that compliance with those commitments would be subject to verification by national and international mechanisms through the individual or joint participation of the Organization of American States (OAS) and the United Nations. Immediate, unconditional and unilateral compliance with the Esquipulas II commitments was again called for by the Central American Presidents in the Joint Declaration issued at Alejuela, Costa Rica, in January 1988. The call was elaborated upon at the Summits of Costa del Sol, El Salvador; Tela, Honduras; and San Isidro Cornado, Costa Rica. At these Summits, held in February, August and December of 1989, respectively, it was agreed, among other things, to call for a more active role for the United Nations and its accelerated participation in the Central American peace process in order to promote the implementation of the commitments entered into. With these demonstrations of sovereign will and the conviction of the Central American countries that the best way to achieve peace was through the peaceful settlement of disputes, the United Nations entered into a historic phase in Central America by becoming involved and participating in the solution of internal conflicts in sovereign States. Security Council resolution 644 (1989) of 7 November 1989 authorized the setting up of a United Nations Observer Group in Central America (ONUCA), with a mandate to verify the cessation of aid to irregular forces and the non-use of the territory of a State to attack another State and to establish verification centres for that purpose in critical sectors of the region. Later the mandate was extended to allow for participation in the demobilization of the Nicaraguan resistance and the monitoring of the cease- fire and the separation of forces in Nicaragua. It is important to mention these mechanisms, because their creation contributed to reducing tensions between the Central American Governments and to establishing a climate of trust between countries, something which, if followed, would promote conditions fostering peace through deterrence and preventive action. In El Salvador, in compliance with Esquipulas II and reaffirming the political will to seek peace through political means, dialogue and negotiation, the Government took steps to initiate its implementation of the commitments undertaken. It did so in particular by establishing the National Reconciliation Commission; by proposing a third Government-FDR-FMLN meeting which was then held in San Salvador on 6 October 1987, whose results were limited, but important, since both sides committed themselves to seek peace, achieve dialogue and support the Esquipulas II process; and by creating commissions to seek and prepare agreements to end the armed conflict and democratize the country. Unfortunately, internal and external conditions from 1987 to 1989 were not the most favourable to progress in the peace process. The polarization of society, increased armed activities and new acts of violence in El Salvador, as well as external support for and solidarity with the irregular forces, all had a negative effect on efforts to find a speedy end to the armed conflict. It was in this context that the process of dialogue was continued on the coming to power of the Administration of President Alfredo Cristiani, who upon taking office on 1 July 1989 expressed his determination and commitment to end the armed conflict by peaceful and democratic means, proposing a permanent, continuous and substantive dialogue. The resulting meetings between the Government and the FMLN in Mexico, in September of that year, produced favourable expectations, since Given that situation, at the beginning of 1989, on the initiative of the Government of El Salvador, the United Nations was approached to request the assistance of the Secretary-General to re-initiate the negotiating process in accordance with the agreement on a permanent dialogue. This allowed for the holding of separate consultations with representatives of the FMLN. On this basis, at the request of the Central American Presidents, agreed at the summit of San Isidro Coronado, Costa Rica, in December 1989, and in the framework of the mandate of good offices established in Security Council resolution 637 (1989), the Secretary-General undertook consultations with the Government of El Salvador and the FMLN to establish the format for promotion of the peace process that was formally reflected in the Geneva Agreement of 4 April 1990. As of that time, the peace process in El Salvador entered a new stage, in which the United Nations would not only be an observer but also a major player and would, thereby, expand its presence and its contribution to the solution of conflicts in Central America in the interests of peace and democracy. This stage, which would develop under the auspices of the Secretary-General, would make the peace process irreversible, as it would test the political will and the credibility of the parties to the conflict — in particular, for having given assurances that they would act responsibly and in good faith to seek peace through negotiations, in compliance with their commitments, and to avoid abandoning the process. But this also meant greater responsibility for the Organization as it entrusted the Secretary-General with a good-offices function and asked him to make maximum efforts to contribute to bringing an end to the armed conflict. At this point I wish to emphasize that this stage was facilitated internally by the people of El Salvador expressing themselves through the majority of its political forces, which were tired of war, but basically because of the conviction of the Government of El Salvador and the FMLN that the armed struggle would not lead to a solution of the serious and profound national problems but, on the contrary, would make them worse, and, at the international level, because of the end of the cold war and its implications for the Central American region. Beginning in April 1990 and up to 31 December 1991, there were hard, complex and gradual negotiations. These culminated in the First Act of New York, which formally put an end to the armed conflict — a conflict that had been a tragedy for the people of El Salvador causing untold suffering and innumerable sacrifices and resulting in the loss of more than 75,000 human lives and the creation of more than 1 million refugees and displaced persons, as well as material destruction. The complexity of the crisis in El Salvador — which necessitated not only putting an end to the armed conflict but also agreeing on the changes that were necessary to the promotion of democratization in the country for the purpose of guaranteeing unconditional respect for human rights and re-uniting Salvadorian society — entailed maximum efforts on the part of the Secretary-General and his Special Representative to encourage parties to modify their positions, and to overcome contradictions and the critical factors that endangered the process, with a view to achieving and formalizing agreements in accordance with the timetable of the negotiating process that was adopted in Caracas, Venezuela, on 21 May 1990. The outcome of the negotiations, contained in various agreements — San José, July 1990; Mexico, April 1991; New York, September and December 1991 and January 1992; and Chapultepec, January 1992 — in addition to ending the war and demobilizing the insurgency, provided a broader, multidisciplinary framework which included provisions concerning respect and guarantees for human rights, constitutional reforms in respect of the armed forces, the judicial, electoral and human-rights systems, the establishment of the Commission on the Truth to investigate serious acts of violence committed since 1980, the creation of a national mechanism to verify the agreements — National Commission for the Consolidation of Peace — a process of cleansing the armed forces based on the investigation of all its members by an ad hoc commission, the reduction and overcoming of impunity, the abolition of security groups, the doctrine and education system of the armed forces, the establishment of a new national civil police force, the outlawing of illegal groups, the political and institutional participation of the FMLN and measures The implementation of this set of agreements, especially after the signing for peace in Chapultepec, have been the pillars on which rest the aspirations of the people of El Salvador to overcome economic and social imbalances that have prevailed throughout its history and to achieve transparency in the political process and reconciliation among its people, leading to permanent social peace. Pursuant to a sovereign decision of the Government of El Salvador and the political will of the Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN), the participation of the United Nations was not limited to contributing to the success of the negotiating process and concluding partial agreements, such as the set of political commitments enunciated in the agreement of Chapultepec. The obligations and responsibilities of the United Nations also included the delicate function of international verification on the ground that the commitments entered into by the parties following the end of the armed conflict were being complied with. These commitments had been laid down not only in the Esquipulas II Agreements but also in the Agreements of Geneva, Caracas and San José on human rights. At the request of the Government of El Salvador and the FMLN, and following the dispatch of a preliminary mission to El Salvador and a favourable report from the Secretary-General, the Security Council decided, prior to the cessation of hostilities, to create a comprehensive mechanism to monitor compliance with the Agreements that gradually resulted from the negotiations. To that end, under Security Council resolution 693 (1991) of 20 May 1991, the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL) was established, initially with a mandate limited to active verification of compliance with the Agreement on respecting and guaranteeing human rights. Later — on 14 January 1992 — the mandate was expanded by resolution 729 (1992), which established the Division of Military Observers who would verify the cessation of the armed conflict and specific agreements relative to the armed forces, and the Division of Police Observers, which would cooperate in the field of law and order. Consequently, between 26 July 1990 and the present, ONUSAL has performed an extraordinary and praiseworthy role. The general opinion is that it has been one of the most successful peace-keeping operations ever developed by the United Nations. “The Organization played a central role in the negotiation of the peace accords from start to finish and has overseen a multidimensional peace-keeping and peace-building operation in whose design it played a key part. It remains engaged in the transition from peace-keeping to post-conflict peace- building.” (S/1994/1212, para. 28) “The Salvadorian peace process holds the promise of being a remarkably successful achievement once it is completed. However, certain key undertakings have yet to be implemented, although it is expected that this can be done within a reasonable period of time.” (ibid., para. 29). In fact, the peace process in El Salvador is continuing to develop successfully, but it has not yet been completed. The recent free and democratic elections held in March and April this year are a significant step forward, but the full success of this process will be attained only when the outstanding agreements have been fully implemented. The full and total compliance with those agreements, and the promotion of a culture of peace in El Salvador are firm commitments that have been repeated by President Armando Calderón Sol. We deeply appreciate the efforts made by the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, and by his predecessor, Mr. Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, as well as by their Special Representatives; the efforts made by the friendly countries that have consistently supported the process: Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Spain and the United States; the constant attention that the members of the Security Council have given and continue to give to developments in El Salvador by adopting measures to promote the peace process; the assistance of the organizations of the United Nations system, in particular the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the World Health Organization, the United Nations Children’s Fund and the specialized agencies; and, in general, the support of the international community, which has demonstrated its solidarity with the aspirations of the people of El Salvador. To all of them, we reiterate our gratitude and appreciation for their contribution to the successes and progress we have achieved so far. At the

I thank the representative of El Salvador for the kind words he addressed to me. It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to vote on the draft resolution before it. Unless I hear any objection, I shall put the draft resolution to the vote. There being no objection, it is so decided. I shall first call on those members of the Council who wish to make statements before the voting.

On 16 January 1992, the Government of El Salvador and the Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN) subscribed to the Peace Accords of Chapultepec, putting an end to a decade of civil war, which had torn the country asunder at a high cost in human lives and material damage, as the representative of El Salvador, Mr. Castaneda, has just reminded us. Six months previously, on 20 May 1991, the Security Council had decided to establish a United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL) to verify all the agreements concluded between the parties within the framework of the peace process which had begun under the auspices of the United Nations. At that time, ONUSAL’s initial mandate included verification of compliance with the San José agreements on human rights, the only one that had been concluded at that date. Later, on 14 January 1992, two days before the signing of the Chapultepec Accords, the Council decided to expand the mandate of ONUSAL to include verification of the Accords, which were to be signed in Mexico City. During the more than three years that ONUSAL has been present in El Salvador, that country has largely overcome the political and social antagonisms that had led to the armed conflict. Last spring, under the supervision of ONUSAL and many international observers, elections were held which this Council determined to be appropriate in terms of their freedom and security. Those elections confirmed the participation of the FMLN in the democratic We should therefore consider that ONUSAL’s mission has been a considerable success for the international community as a whole, and specifically for the United Nations. But above all, it represents the success of the people of El Salvador. I wish to pay tribute here to all those who made these results possible, in particular President Cristiani, the leadership of the FMLN, the leaders of other political and social forces, as well as the successive Secretaries-General of the United Nations, Mr. Pérez de Cuéllar and Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, and their Special Representatives in El Salvador, Mr. Riza, Mr. Ramírez Ocampo and Mr. ter Horst, as well as all the members of ONUSAL. The positive notes that have emerged from this process cannot prevent us from alluding to problems and delays that occurred and that still exist in the implementation of the Peace Accords. We continue to be concerned in particular about some outstanding matters relating to public security, the land programmes, the programmes for the reintegration of combatants, the full implementation of the recommendations of the Commission on the Truth, and those concerning the judiciary and electoral reform, as explained by the Secretary-General in his report of 31 October last (S/1994/1212). Another factor which is of especial concern to my delegation is the persistent recourse to violence for political or other ends and, in particular, the activity of illegal armed groups. In this regard, we consider it extremely important that the Salvadorian institutions should take into account the observations and recommendations of the Joint Group for the Investigation of Politically Motivated Illegal Armed Groups contained in the report of 28 July 1994. In this regard, I wish to highlight the assistance given by several Governments, including the Government of Spain, to the investigations and activities undertaken by the Joint Group. However, as a whole we must emphasize that significant grounds for hope can be found in the attitude of the Administration of El Salvador, with President Calderón Sol at its head, as well as on the part of the FMLN and the great majority of the social and political sectors in El Salvador. I would recall in this respect President Calderón Sol’s continued commitment to the Peace Accords and the There are positive signs that those problems will be overcome, although some of them, such as those dealing with the programmes for reintegration or reform of the judicial system, may not be fully completed in the next few months. We believe, together with the Secretary-General, that we must maintain ONUSAL until 30 April 1995, albeit with a considerable reduction of its strength, a reduction which should not impede the effective fulfilment of its responsibilities. By that date we hope that the critical issue of the full deployment of the National Civil Police will have been resolved, as will the parallel demobilization of the former National Police. In this manner, the main nucleus of the verification activities of ONUSAL could be considered completed. There are other components of the Peace Accords, some of which are very sensitive, in particular the programmes for the reintegration of former combatants and the recommendations of the Commission on the Truth, which are also critical for the consolidation of peace in El Salvador, though their full implementation may require a longer period of time. In this respect, we join in the view expressed by the Secretary-General that it is essential that the United Nations fulfil its commitment to the people of El Salvador to verify full compliance with the Peace Accords. The coming end of ONUSAL should in no way signify the end of the efforts by the United Nations in El Salvador nor its turning its back on those commitments, and we have just heard that that is also the view held by the Government of El Salvador, expressed here through its authorized representative at the United Nations. In this regard, the draft resolution submitted by the countries that form the Group of Friends of the Secretary- General on El Salvador together with the United States reflects the renewal of ONUSAL’s mandate for a final period, until 30 April 1995. It also reflects the Secretary- General’s intention to consider ways in which the United Nations may fulfil its commitment to verify the Peace Accords that will extend beyond ONUSAL, in other words, in the period following its withdrawal. Spain has lent its full support to the peace process in El Salvador since its inception. We have participated in the Group of Friends of the Secretary-General to facilitate negotiations and a political rapprochement among the parties, and we have also contributed police, military and civilian personnel to ONUSAL, which has always been quantitatively and qualitatively important. All of this shows Spain’s commitment to the Salvadorian peace process. This commitment predated the establishment of ONUSAL, and all Salvadorians may rest assured that it will continue beyond the duration of its mandate.

I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document S/1994/1332.

There were 15 votes in favour. The draft resolution has been adopted unanimously as resolution 961 (1994). I shall now call on those members of the Council who wish to make statements following the voting.

My delegation wishes to express its gratitude to the Secretary-General for his comprehensive reports on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL) and on the Joint Group for the Investigation of Politically Motivated Illegal Armed Groups. We also thank him for all his efforts and for those of all United Nations men and women to date in respect of the peace process in El Salvador. The report on the Mission contains details on the fulfilment of its mandate, the proposal for its gradual My country has continued, through ONUSAL, to participate in and follow closely developments in the Salvadorian peace process. At this time, we cannot but be concerned at the delays with respect to some commitments which had been envisaged in the timetable of pending agreements. The delay in the deployment of the National Civil Police, the land-transfer programmes, the reintegration of ex-combatants and the full and unequivocal implementation of the recommendations of the Commission on the Truth — all of these are areas in which progress must still be made in order for the peace process fully to be consolidated. While we should make it clear that the causes of certain delays in the outstanding commitments are not directly attributable to the parties, we must reaffirm the need to observe the Peace Accords in the light of the commitments that emerge from the avowed political will of the Government of El Salvador and the Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN). We have also received and studied carefully the report of the Joint Group for the Investigation of Politically Motivated Illegal Armed Groups. It is essential to note with respect to that report the importance of the recommendation to provide the National Civil Police with all human and material resources necessary to carry out the work of criminal investigation in order to assure the people of El Salvador that organized crime and political violence will be eradicated, regardless of the degree of relationship between these two scourges. In this context, the commitments envisaged with respect to judicial reform acquire due relevance and are fully justified. For my delegation, they are truly priority areas. Finally, we wish to emphasize the importance of strengthening the efforts of the State in respect of the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms through strict control of the responsible institutions, in keeping with the recommendations of the Commission on the Truth. The last renewal of ONUSAL’s mandate does not mean that the United Nations intends to turn its back on the peace process in El Salvador. This commitment, together with the continued support of the Organization, to the sister republic of El Salvador stands, irrespective of the direct involvement of this body. The fact that the peace process, The peace process in El Salvador has evolved in a positive manner for the people of El Salvador. We trust that the continuation of the efforts deployed will lead to a successful conclusion of this stage as well.

The Brazilian Government has consistently and closely followed the course of events in the sister nation of El Salvador. We have noted with satisfaction that both the Government and the FMLN have endeavoured to contribute to strengthening dialogue by putting aside specific demands that could undermine the peace process as a whole. The United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL), to which Brazil has contributed military and police observers, has been instrumental in achieving progress in the consolidation of peace. We thus consider that it is essential for the United Nations to reaffirm its support for the peace process in El Salvador and its pledge to contribute to its success. In this regard, we wish to express our gratitude to the Secretary-General, to his Special Representative, Mr. Ter Horst, and to the personnel of ONUSAL for their tireless efforts for peace and national reconciliation in El Salvador. The latest report submitted by the Secretary-General on ONUSAL rightly focused on the necessity fully to implement the Peace Accords. Some pending issues, such as the full deployment of the National Civil Police and the phasing out of the old national police, are particularly disquieting. We should recall that public security policy is one of the critical elements and mainstays of the Peace Accords. In addition, we should keep in mind the need to advance the land transfer and reintegration processes. If the delay and the difficulties experienced in the implementation of the Peace Accords are recognized as a source of concern, we should at the same time not lose sight of the fact that the lack of adequate organization and financial support has delayed compliance with those accords. As the Secretary-General points out in his report, Indeed, much has been accomplished. At this final hour it would be disturbing if the United Nations were to step aside from the process. Hence, we strongly supported resolution 961 (1994), adopted just now, especially because it extends the current mandate of ONUSAL until 30 April 1995. In any case, even after the completion of ONUSAL’s mandate, we should not contemplate the termination of all activities of the United Nations in El Salvador. Further assistance, especially in El Salvador’s efforts towards development, is clearly required. Brazil believes that the peace process which has developed in El Salvador should be seen as an example of the meaningful contribution that the United Nations can make to a people’s efforts to solve problems that could affect the security of a region or subregion. The feisty and hard-working people of El Salvador deserve nothing less.

The experience of the Salvadorian peace process shows that the good faith of the parties concerned in reconciliation and their political will to seek lasting peace are the keys to the settlement of conflicts. In this regard, the Government of El Salvador and the Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN) have set a good example. They have pledged time and again to fully implement the Peace Accords and issued a joint declaration for this purpose on 4 October this year. This has laid the political foundation for El Salvador’s quest for a lasting peace, for which we wish to express our appreciation. Stability is a fundamental condition for a country’s development. Peace, stability and development are the common aspirations of people all over the world. It is on the basis of this fundamental position that we have been firmly supporting the Salvadorian people in their unremitting efforts to free themselves from the scourge of war and rebuild peace, as well as supporting the United Nations, particularly the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL), in its continued efforts to verify, at the request of both parties in El Salvador, the implementation of the Peace Accords, thus making their due contributions to the Salvadorian peace process. It is also on the basis of this fundamental position that the Chinese delegation voted in favour of the Security Council resolution just adopted to extend the mandate of ONUSAL.

My delegation was pleased to vote in favour of this resolution, which has extended the mandate of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL) for one final period until 30 April 1995. That operation, which has in many respects been a model one, must soon come to an end, its mandate accomplished. We have reason to hail this success of our Organization. Democratic elections have taken place and the country has now embarked on the road of restoring democracy and reconstruction. Still, the Council’s satisfaction cannot be complete, because there have been delays in implementing various programmes and because violence has persisted. In this respect the report of the Joint Group for Investigation of Politically Motivated Illegal Armed Groups in El Salvador causes us particular concern. Five months remain to achieve all the United Nations objectives. This must be done within the established time-frame. We therefore call upon the parties to cooperate with ONUSAL and to respect the commitments undertaken in conformity with the Peace Accords and the recommendations of the Commission on the Truth. The implementation of the land-transfer programme, the establishment of the new National Civil Police, and judicial reform are key elements for the proper functioning of the institutions of, and the establishment of a lasting peace in, El Salvador. Logistically, this operation must be completed under good conditions as well. Consequently, we consider it Naturally, the end of ONUSAL’s mandate on 30 April does not mean that the United Nations will no longer take an interest in El Salvador. Rather, we will enter a new phase, one of consolidating peace, during which it will be up to the United Nations specialized agencies to assist in the recovery of the country and particularly in the strengthening of its institutions. We therefore await with interest the suggestions of the Secretary-General for this new period.

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as representative of the United States. The peace process in El Salvador has shown the United Nations at its best: a dynamic negotiator, innovative organizer and effective peace-keeper. It is a testament to the work of the men and women of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL) that today the Council has adopted a resolution which in five months puts ONUSAL out of a job. We all know how difficult and rare it is to celebrate the fulfilment of the mandate of a peace- keeping mission. We congratulate the United Nations on a job well begun and soon to be well done. Although the Council calls for ONUSAL to finish its work in the near future, it is imperative that outstanding elements of the Peace Accords be implemented as promptly as possible, within the timetable agreed on in May of this year. It is still a matter of concern to my Government that important elements of the Peace Accords remain to be implemented, especially in the areas of public security and the recommendations of the Commission on the Truth. The next five months are important to consolidate the progress made to date and to move further to implement outstanding elements of the Peace Accords. We urge all parties to act on the Council’s call to redouble efforts to see all aspects of the Peace Accords implemented before the end of March 1995. The Council recognizes that El Salvador has moved far enough down the road to peace and reconciliation to continue without the presence of a United Nations peace- However, this does not mean that the international community is abandoning its responsibilities to ensure full implementation of all elements of the Peace Accords. On the contrary, the commitment of the international community, and of my Government, to the consolidation of peace and democracy in El Salvador remains strong. We simply acknowledge that in El Salvador we have reached a new phase. Today’s resolution makes clear that this final extension will be sufficient to complete the peace-keeping mandate in El Salvador, that the personnel staffing ONUSAL will be withdrawn by the end of this five- month period and that such assistance as may be appropriate after ONUSAL ends on 30 April 1995 will be developed through consultations among the appropriate technical agencies and the Member States. It is time to consider what comes after peace- keeping. In that regard, we welcome the intent of the Secretary-General, as conveyed in his report of 31 October, to consider the proper mechanisms by which the United Nations will comply with its obligation to verify full implementation of the Peace Accords. In closing, let me warmly congratulate the people of El Salvador, who have persevered, sometimes at great risk, to bring about real change in their society. We are confident that El Salvador faces a bright future and believe credit must go to the leadership and people of El Salvador for making democratization and reconciliation a reality in their country. We encourage them to continue to work for reform in the months ahead. Peace in El Salvador came because a nation tired of fighting wanted to work together; peace in El Salvador will continue as long as the commitment to forging a common future in a free and democratic system prevails. I now resume my function as President of the Council. There are no further speakers. The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda.