Mr. Essy Cote d'Ivoire president
The meeting was called to order at 10.40 a.m.
Address by Mr. Glafcos Clerides, President of the Republic of Cyprus
The Assembly will first hear an address by the President of the Republic of Cyprus.
Mr. Glafcos Clerides, President of the Republic of Cyprus, was escorted into the General Assembly Hall.
On behalf of the General Assembly, I have the honour to welcome to the United Nations the President of the Republic of Cyprus, His Excellency Mr. Glafcos Clerides, and to invite him to address the Assembly.
I should like to extend to you, Sir, my warmest felicitations on your well-deserved election to the high office of the presidency of the General Assembly. This is not only a mere recognition of your long experience and your outstanding ability and diplomatic skill but also a reflection of the esteem in which your country, Côte d'Ivoire, is held in the United Nations.
I should also like to express our great appreciation and admiration for the work of the Secretary-General and for the determined and prudent leadership which he has demonstrated on vital international issues.
Despite important positive developments on a great number of issues occupying the attention and energy of our Organization, a significant number of old problems remain unresolved. Ethnic conflicts, nationalistic chauvinism, ethnic cleansing, xenophobia, racial discrimination, expansionist opportunism, social and economic disparities, underdevelopment, the waste of scarce resources on fraternal enmities, the lack of necessary commitment for the protection of the environment and gross and massive violations of human rights are only some of the evils still afflicting humanity today.
Among our priorities therefore should be the unequivocal reversal of the results of aggression and foreign occupation, support and defence of democracy, the inversion of social and economic inequalities, the protection of our environment and, finally, the protection and enhancement of human rights for all.
In order to accomplish such goals on a universal scale our Organization has to adapt, expeditiously and effectively, to the changing conditions and to the new challenges. Better coordination between the various bodies that form the United Nations system is urgently required. The Secretary-General's recent decision to boost the coordinating role of the United Nations Development Programme on all developmental issues is a commendable step in the right direction.
We are constantly witnessing world calamities. Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia are dire and gory examples. Our common goal should be to strengthen the United Nations in order best to respond to today's challenges and the increased expectations of mankind for security, economic viability and democracy. These expectations can only be met by making the United Nations more effective through the implementation of its own resolutions and the mandatory provisions of the Charter.
The General Assembly, the most prominent global democratic forum, represents the full membership of the United Nations. It functions on the principle of sovereign equality. As such, it has played a major role towards the realization of the objectives of the world community and must continue to do so in accordance with its mandate under the Charter.
Given today's political realities, however, the Security Council has a substantially enlarged agenda and a more dynamic role to perform. In accordance with the Charter, that organ has the ability to decide and to act. Nowadays it is able to act more effectively in the maintenance of international peace and security. In today's post-cold-war era the Security Council is in a position to play a broader and much more important role than ever before. In a world where new challenges require urgent solutions, such a development is welcome. Within the context of the reinforced and expanded role, a successful outcome of the deliberations on the review of the Council's membership to reflect the realities of today's world is highly appreciated.
However, the effectiveness of the most powerful organ of the United Nations is seriously compromised if it applies double standards. It must act in every case with determination and consistency. The record of its performance indicates clearly that in those cases where the international community has shown steadfastness to defend the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter and fully to implement its provisions, peace and justice was achieved. On the contrary, in those cases where unity of purpose had not been exhibited or the interests of nations or alliances had been placed above the universal principles and the rule of law, the problems remain and peace is elusive.
The financial difficulties confronting the Organization pose severe constraints on its ever-increasing role in today's world affairs. Every effort should be made to provide the Organization with the necessary means to perform its vital mission effectively. In this regard I would recall that my Government decided early this year, after an appeal by the Secretary-General, to double on a voluntary basis its assessed contribution to all peace-keeping operations.
Our commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes was thus manifested once again in a concrete and practical way. We hope that our gesture will soon be emulated by others. Our Organization desperately needs generosity by its Member States if it is to continue performing its herculean mission effectively.
It is widely acknowledged that economics plays an important role in today's world politics. Development, the protection of the environment, poverty alleviation, social progress, the improvement of health standards, proper education and sound technology require financial means for their attainment. In this exercise the United Nations, through the Secretariat itself, the recently enhanced United Nations Development Programme and the various specialized agencies, performs one of the most important missions, that of pursuing the betterment and the economic well-being of peoples throughout the world. These activities are also amply outlined in the Secretary-General's report, and therefore I do not intend to dwell on them other than to declare that we are cognizant of their importance and that they have our full support. We commend the Secretary-General's integrated approach to development issues in "An Agenda for Development", which complements his ground-breaking "An Agenda for Peace". We fully subscribe to the Secretary-General's assertion that development is a fundamental human right and that development is the most secure basis for peace.
In accordance with the deliberations on the subject, a successful implementation of the agenda for development depends on the priority to be given the following elements: the alleviation of poverty and its underlying causes, especially in Africa and other least-developed regions; health and the status of women. There is an urgent need for clear and effective population policies.
In this regard, the recently concluded Cairo Conference on Population and Development rightly placed great emphasis on development and the environment. The new characteristic of the Conference's Programme of Action is precisely this linkage with sustainable development and protection of the environment. It constitutes progress by integrating control of population, environmental protection and economic growth into the approach to population issues.
The Rio Conference was a historic turning point in this direction. Yet the follow-up and implementation of the decisions taken at the Earth Summit remain contingent on the political will to save our living space's web of life.
The Barbados Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, as the first test of the international community's attachment to the Rio commitments, focused on the acute problems that small island developing States are confronted with. Cyprus, an active member of this group, reiterates its commitment to the early and prompt implementation of the Barbados commitments, and expresses the hope that every member of the international community will conscientiously fulfil its relevant obligations.
We also welcome the recent broader agreement on seabed issues of the Convention on the Law of the Sea promoting universal application of the new legal order governing the seas and thus opening a new chapter in international relations.
In the light of our philosophy and experience, we attach much importance to the effective functioning of the principal judicial organ of the United Nations - the International Court of Justice. The increase in its jurisdiction in contentious cases is encouraging. We also attach great significance to the possibility of clarifying legal points in political disputes through advisory opinions. The International Court of Justice is indeed an integral part of the United Nations peacemaking efforts and we wholeheartedly support the Secretary-General's proposal that he be authorized to seek advisory opinions from the Court as an important component of the peaceful settlement of disputes in accordance with the United Nations Charter.
The Secretariat's role in an improved, rationalized and more effective United Nations is irrefutable. We have nothing but praise for the many men and women in the international civil service whose competence and dedication under harsh circumstances enable the Organization to respond to the ever-increasing demands in today's global environment. The Secretary-General has already done much in the direction of rationalizing and streamlining the Secretariat. He certainly has our support in the additional measures needed to carry out this task. We join in recognizing the imperative need for adequate financial resources for the Organization, and for assessed contributions to be paid in full and promptly by Member States.
It should be recognized that true respect for human rights provides the foundation for the structure and organization of any society. Past and recent experience in every region of the world has demonstrated that the protection and promotion of human rights is an indispensable ingredient of a stable, just and democratic world order. Over the years, the United Nations has played a leading role in affirming human equality, which in essence forms the core of all rights, and in eliminating separations based on ethnicity, religion, culture, socio-economic disparities and political philosophies.
If we recognize the value of the axiom that in States governed by the rule of law the rights of citizens must be protected unconditionally, then we should also accept the analogy: that the same rights should be safeguarded for every single citizen of a global State governed by the rule of law.
All the efforts of today's global community should therefore be exerted towards the implementation of the basic idea inherent in the international law of human rights - namely, that all the social mechanisms should exist to enhance the dignity of human beings, not to exploit them. Human rights are a powerful means to this end.
In order to achieve full respect for human rights and to eliminate human suffering, the world community must clearly oppose extreme nationalism, take unequivocal stands against policies of "ethnic cleansing" and continue exerting steadfast efforts until we achieve the concrete dismantling of unjust and inhumane social systems that are based on ethnic segregation.
The effective promotion of human rights is naturally entwined with the global trend towards democratization. Cyprus is in the vanguard of States that have become party to international instruments for the protection of human rights, both at the global level, within the United Nations and at the regional level, primarily through the Council of Europe.
We have had occasion in the past to express our support for the Secretary-General's constructive and timely suggestions for improving the potential of United Nations peace-keeping. We are encouraged that much progress has been made in this field. In view, however, of the ever-increasing demands and the worsening financial problems associated with peace-keeping, we should continue to do our best to assist in discharging, as effectively as possible, this major responsibility of the Organization. In this regard, may I recall that Cyprus, itself a victim of foreign aggression, invasion and occupation, has voluntarily undertaken the onus of paying on a yearly basis one-third of the total cost of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP), which for the current 12-month period amounts to $18 million. Similarly, the Greek Government generously offered a voluntary contribution to UNFICYP of $6.5 million for the same period.
Since the Republic of Cyprus has itself been one of the longest beneficiaries of peace-keeping operations, I would like to avail myself of this opportunity to express the appreciation of my country and its people to the Organization and its peace-keeping function. I also take this opportunity to express to the troop-contributing countries our gratitude for sustaining UNFICYP for so many years until the anomaly in the financing of the Force was finally overcome in June 1993. On this occasion, I should like to express the hope that a sound and fair solution to the question of reimbursement to troop-contributing countries will be found during the deliberations at this session. My country stands ready to offer every possible assistance towards the attainment of this aim.
I shall refrain from addressing the long list of international problems described in this year's report by the Secretary-General (A/49/1) with which the Organization is actively dealing and which extend to all five continents. Each issue presents its own complications and special characteristics. Together, all the issues provide a measure of the enormity of what is expected of the United Nations, the awesome burden of responsibilities of the Secretary-General and the respect and admiration he deserves in carrying out these tasks. As he has rightly pointed out in the past:
"The United Nations, by undertaking a range of problems as wide as the globe itself, must be expected to achieve successes but also to experience failures." (A/48/1, para. 512)
Our world has witnessed in the last few years the creation of new areas of tension and conflict through the unleashing of the destructive and centrifugal forces of chauvinism and ethnic strife. There have also been at the same time some notable successes through the resolution of several regional issues and the withdrawal of foreign forces following the end of our bipolar antagonistic world. We have witnessed in many parts of the world the triumph of reason, the entrenchment of democracy and the emergence of free market economies. The achievement of putting an end to the odious practice of apartheid in South Africa broadens the vistas of human wisdom; the historic Agreements between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) on the one hand, and between Israel and other neighbouring Arab countries on the other mark a new era in the Middle East. We express the hope that the rest of the countries involved in this conflict will very soon be able to join the others, thereby signifying one of the major turning points in the history of the region. Cyprus, an immediate neighbour, expresses the hope that such a catalytic positive evolution in our region will not leave our own problem unaffected.
Cyprus, almost a decade after the Cold War began to subside, remains divided as a result of foreign aggression and military occupation, and its people forcibly separated. As a result of ethnic cleansing by the aggressor, Cypriots are victims of gross violations of human rights. A large component of the Cyprus question in its present dimensions is the massive violation of the human rights of the displaced persons who have been evicted by force from their homes by the Turkish forces of occupation and whose properties have been usurped by illegal settlers imported from Turkey to Cyprus in a systematic and well-planned policy made by the aggressor to change the demographic composition of the occupied parts of Cyprus. In the same vein, the humanitarian issue of the enclave is another staggering dimension of the Cyprus question. The missing persons still remain unaccounted for 20 years after the Turkish invasion and occupation of one third of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus. This constitutes a severe violation of the human rights both of the missing persons themselves and of the tragic figures of their relatives.
I put it before the Assembly today that Cyprus is a test case for the resolve of the international community and of this Organization to demand and to enforce respect for its will as expressed in a plethora of resolutions.
Twenty years after the Turkish invasion of 1974, the problem remains unresolved. The number of Turkish forces, despite resolutions of this Assembly calling for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Cyprus, has in fact increased, as is stated in the Secretary-General's report of 30 May 1994. The presence of Turkish occupation troops constitutes a serious threat to the people of Cyprus, and has naturally given rise to a kind of arms race.
The General Assembly and the Security Council have repeatedly reaffirmed the legal framework within which a just and lasting solution should be sought. In its most recent resolution, resolution 939 (1994) of 29 July 1994, this basis is reaffirmed to be
"... a State of Cyprus with a single sovereignty and independence and international personality and a single citizenship, with its independence and territorial integrity safeguarded, and comprising two politically equal communities as described in the relevant Security Council resolutions, in a bi-communal and bi-zonal federation, and that such a settlement must exclude union in whole or in part with any other country or any form of partition or secession" (para. 2).
The Greek Cypriot side has for years accepted that a bi-zonal bi-communal federation was the basis for the settlement of the Cyprus problem. The Turkish Cypriot leadership, fully supported by Turkey, has now made it clear that they have abandoned federation as the basis of the solution and are promoting a loose confederation with separate sovereignty for its two component parts.
The Secretary-General rightly and clearly attributed the failure to make progress as follows:
"For the present, the Security Council finds itself faced with an already familiar scenario: the absence of agreement due essentially to a lack of political will on the Turkish Cypriot side." (S/1994/629, para. 53)
In the same report to the Security Council, the Secretary-General states the following:
"... a good offices mission, which by its nature is dependent on the consent and cooperation of the parties, is not an adequate method to deal with a situation in which, for the past several years, one side has consistently flouted the wishes of the international community, as represented in the Security Council." (ibid., para. 58)
My view is that if this flouting and violation of Security Council resolutions is allowed to continue, there will be no solution of the Cyprus problem. It is therefore necessary for coercive action to be taken against the side that flouts the United Nations resolutions.
There is also a further issue that requires to be urgently addressed. This is the problem of the military build-up which is taking place in Cyprus. The anxieties created by the presence of foreign troops on Cypriot territory have given rise to a significant military build-up.
Security is an extremely significant area, and is an issue of substance as well as a way to improve confidence. I have therefore proposed the following.
Firstly, the leaders of the two communities during the intercommunal talks should make a solemn declaration to the Secretary-General on behalf of their respective communities renouncing the use of force against each other and undertaking to take all the necessary measures to prevent attack by members of one community against the other.
Secondly, the Government of the Republic should take the following measures: repeal the National Guard Law, disband the National Guard and hand over all its arms and military equipment to the custody of the United Nations peace-keeping force; undertake to maintain the police force of the Republic at its present numerical strength, armed only with light weapons; undertake the total cost of a substantially numerically increased United Nations peace-keeping force; agree that the United Nations peace-keeping force will have the right of inspection to ascertain compliance with the above; agree that the National Guard armoured cars, armoured personnel vehicles and tanks, which will be handed over to the custody of the United Nations peace-keeping force, can be used by the United Nations peace-keeping force to patrol the buffer zone and to prevent intrusions in it; and deposit in United Nations accounts all money saved from disbanding the National Guard and from stopping the purchase of arms after deducting the cost of the United Nations peace-keeping force, to be used after the solution of the problem for the benefit of both communities.
The Turkish Government, parallel to the above, should withdraw the Turkish occupation forces from Cyprus, as well as the illegal settlers, whose presence in Cyprus, apart from violating United Nations resolutions calling on both sides to respect the demographic composition of Cyprus, constitutes a military threat.
The Turkish Cypriots under arms should disband and hand over their weapons to the peace-keeping force.
The Turkish side complains that it has been isolated internationally. The responsibility for this does not fall on the Republic of Cyprus or on the international community. It falls squarely on the shoulders of the Turkish leadership, which, by an act of purported secession, declared a separate State. The international community and the Republic of Cyprus simply respected Security Council resolutions 541 (1983) and 550 (1984), which deplored the purported secession, asked all States Members of the United Nations not to recognize it and called upon the Turkish leadership to recall the act of secession. All States respected these resolutions except Turkey.
A small country has been violated by an aggressor, in contravention of the Charter of this Organization, which denounces the use of force. Twenty years have passed, and the Security Council's many resolutions remain unimplemented. Unless the aggressor is faced with progressively more severe consequences for its disregard of international legal order, a very bad example and precedent will be allowed to cast doubt on the international community's resolve and effectiveness.
With the advent of the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations, we are bound to review our past performance and chart new avenues for the future. Did we meet the goals set in 1945 by our founding fathers in the aftermath of two devastating wars? Did we create the prerequisite for a just and peaceful world? Did we save succeeding generations from the scourge of war? As we near the milestone of the Organization's fiftieth anniversary, let us do some soul-searching, let us not be complacent and let us no longer be guilty of errors of omission and commission. Above all, let us not remain inactive because of inertia. People and nations all over the world have ever-greater expectations of the Organization and the way in which it responds to the new challenges of our times. The Charter, by and large, has stood the test of time, but it is our responsibility to make the United Nations a more effective Organization. It is the world's last chance for peace.
On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the Republic of Cyprus for the statement he has just made.
Mr. Glafcos Clerides, President of the Republic of Cyprus, was escorted from the General Assembly Hall.
Address by Mr. Nelson Rorihlahla Mandela, President of the Republic of South Africa
The Assembly will now hear an address by the President of the Republic of South Africa.
Mr. Nelson Rorihlahla Mandela, President of the Republic of South Africa, was escorted into the General Assembly Hall.
On behalf of the General Assembly, I have the honour to welcome to the United Nations the President of the Republic of South Africa, His Excellency Mr. Nelson Mandela, and to invite him to address the Assembly.
It surely must be one of the great ironies of our age that this Assembly is being addressed, for the first time in its 49 years' history, by a South African Head of State drawn from among the African majority of what is an African country.
Future generations will find it strange in the extreme that it was only so late in the twentieth century that it was possible for our delegation to take its seat in the Assembly, recognized both by our people and by the nations of the world as the legitimate representative of the people of our country.
It is indeed most welcome that the Organization will mark its fiftieth anniversary next year with the apartheid system vanquished and consigned to the past. That historic change has come about not least because of the great efforts in which the United Nations engaged to ensure the suppression of the apartheid crime against humanity. Even as it was still in the process of establishing its institutions, the United Nations was confronted by the challenge of the accession to power of the party of apartheid domination in our country. Everything that that system stood for represented the very opposite of all the noble purposes for which the Organization was established. Because apartheid reduced and undermined the credibility of the United Nations as an effective international instrument to end racism and secure the fundamental human rights of all peoples, the establishment and consolidation of apartheid constituted a brazen challenge to the very existence of the Organization.
The United Nations was born out of the titanic struggle against nazism and fascism, with their pernicious doctrines and practices of racial superiority and genocide. It therefore could not stand by while, in South Africa, a similar system was being established by a Government which also had the temerity to claim representation within the United Nations.
We believe that it was indeed of great importance to the universal efficacy of, and respect for, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Charter that the United Nations should have spurned the pleas of the apartheid regime that the gross violation of human rights in South Africa was a domestic matter of no legal or legitimate concern to the world body.
We stand here today to salute the United Nations and its Member States, both singly and collectively, for joining forces with the masses of our people in a common struggle that has brought about our emancipation and pushed back the frontiers of racism.
The millions of our people say "Thank you" and "Thank you again, because the respect for your own dignity as human beings inspired you to act to ensure the restoration of our dignity as well".
We have together traversed a course which we are convinced has strengthened human solidarity in general and reinforced the bonds of friendship between our peoples and the nations of the world. This dates back to the early days when India put the question of racism in South Africa on the Assembly's agenda, to the moment when the world community, as represented here, could adopt consensus resolutions against apartheid with none dissenting.
It was therefore with great joy that at our inauguration as President of our Republic we received, among others, such high and distinguished officials of the Organization as the Secretary-General, the President of the General Assembly and the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid. Their presence reaffirmed the incontrovertible truth that the victory over apartheid, the success of the cause of democracy, non-racialism and non-sexism in our country belongs as much to our people as it does the United Nations.
And so we have embarked on the road to the remaking of our country, basing ourselves both on the democratic Constitution, which came into force on 27 April this year, and on the Reconstruction and Development Programme, which has become the property of all our people.
Clearly, these documents would have no life unless the people gave them life. The words printed in them must inspire common ownership by all our people and their common allegiance to the process and the results which these documents intend. For this to happen, as we propagate the vision these documents contain we must at the same time engage in a historic effort of redefinition of ourselves as a new nation.
Our watchwords must be justice, peace, reconciliation and nation-building in the pursuit of a democratic, non-racial and non-sexist country. In all that we do we have to ensure the healing of the wounds inflicted on all our people across the great dividing line imposed on our society by centuries of colonialism and apartheid.
We must ensure that colour, race and gender become only a God-given gift to each one of us, and not an indelible mark or attribute that accords a special status to any.
We must work for the day when we as South Africans see one another and interact with one another as equal human beings and as part of one nation united, rather than torn asunder, by its diversity.
The road we shall have to travel to reach this destination will by no means be easy. All of us know how stubbornly racism can cling to the mind and how deeply it can infect the human soul. Where it is sustained by the racial ordering of the material world, as is the case in our country, that stubbornness can multiply a hundredfold.
And yet, however hard this battle may be, we will not surrender. Whatever the time it may take, we will not tire. The very fact that racism degrades both the perpetrator and the victim commands that, if we are true to our commitment to protect human dignity, we fight on until victory is achieved.
We firmly believe that we who have particular experience of the destructive and anti-human force of racism owe it to ourselves to centre our transformation on the creation of a truly non-racial society. Because we know racism so intimately, we must stand a good chance of developing and nurturing its opposite.
It will perhaps come to be that we who have harboured in our country the worst example of racism since the defeat of nazism will make a contribution to human civilization by ordering our affairs in such a manner that we strike an effective and lasting blow against racism everywhere.
Some of the steps that we have already taken - including the establishment of a Government of National Unity, the orderly transformation of the institutions of State and the cultivation of a national consensus on the major issues of the day - have started us off on a correct footing with regard to continuing the processes leading to the creation of the just society we have been speaking of.
Our political emancipation has also brought into sharp focus the urgent need to engage in the struggle to secure our people's freedom from want, from hunger and from ignorance. We have written this on our banners: that the society we seek to create must be a people-centred society; all its institutions and its resources must be dedicated to the pursuit of a better life for all our citizens. That better life must mean an end to poverty, joblessness, homelessness and the despair that comes of deprivation. This is an end in itself because the happiness of the human being must, in any society, be an end in itself.
At the same time, we are intensely conscious of the fact that the stability of the democratic settlement itself and the possibility actually to create a non-racial and non-sexist society depend on our ability to change the material conditions of life of our people so that they not only have the vote but have bread and work as well.
We therefore return to the United Nations to make the commitment that, as we undertook never to rest until the system of apartheid was defeated, so do we now undertake that we cannot rest while millions of our people suffer the pain and indignity of poverty in all its forms.
At the same time, we turn once more to this world body to say "We are going to need your continued support to achieve the goal of the betterment of the conditions of life of our people." We are pleased and inspired that both the Secretary-General and the specialized agencies of the United Nations have taken up the development challenge in South Africa with the enthusiasm that they have shown.
We believe that it is in the common interest that we sustain the common victory that we have scored in South Africa, and take it further by achieving success not only in politics but also in the socio-economic sphere.
It is perhaps common cause among us that everywhere on our globe there is an unmistakable process leading to the entrenchment of democratic systems of government. The empowerment of the ordinary people of our world freely to determine their destiny, unhindered by tyrants and dictators, is at the very heart of the reason for the existence of this Organization.
But it is equally true that hundreds of millions of these politically empowered masses are caught in the deathly trap of poverty, unable to live life in its fullness.
Out of all this are born social conflicts which produce insecurity and instability, civil and other wars that claim many lives, millions of desperate refugees and the destruction of the little wealth that poor countries are able to accumulate. Out of this cauldron are also born tyrants, dictators and demagogues who not only take away or restrict the rights of the people but also make it impossible to do the things that must be done to bring lasting prosperity to the people.
At the same time, the reality can no longer be ignored that we live in an interdependent world which is bound together to a common destiny. The very response of the international community to the challenge of apartheid confirmed this very point that we all understood - that so long as apartheid existed in South Africa, so long would the whole of humanity feel demeaned and degraded.
The United Nations understood very well that racism in our country could not but feed racism in other parts of the world as well. The universal struggle against apartheid was therefore not an act of charity arising out of pity for our people, but an affirmation of our common humanity. We believe that that act of affirmation requires that this Organization should once more turn its focused and sustained attention to the basics of everything that makes for a better world for all humanity.
The elaboration of a new world order must, of necessity, centre on this world body. In it we should find the appropriate forum in which we can all participate to help determine the shape of the new world.
The four elements that will need to be knit together in fashioning that new universal reality are the issues of democracy, peace, prosperity and interdependence.
The great challenge of our age to the United Nations is to answer the question "Given the interdependence of the nations of the world, what is it that we can and must do to ensure that democracy, peace and prosperity prevail everywhere?"
We are aware of the fact that the United Nations is addressing these questions in many ways; yet there can be no gainsaying the fact that such progress as we have made has been made more by stealth than in the bold and determined fashion that the world crisis demands today.
Perhaps a new and forceful initiative is required. Such an initiative should inspire all of humanity because of the seriousness of its intent. It should also have a chance to succeed because it will have been underwritten by the commitment of the masses of the people in each member country to join hands with other nations, to address together the related issues of democracy, peace and prosperity in an interdependent world.
We are aware of the fact that the dictates of realpolitik militate against the speedy realization of such an initiative. But we do believe that the reality of life and the realism of policy will, at some point, bring to the fore the fact that the delay we impose on ourselves today will serve only to increase the pressure on all of us to incorporate, within what we consider possible, a sustainable vision of a common world that will rise or fall together.
Undoubtedly, to inspire greater confidence in itself among all the member nations and to reflect better the impulse towards the democratization of international relations, the United Nations will have to continue looking at itself to determine what restructuring of itself it should effect. This process must naturally affect, among others, the structure and functioning of the Security Council and the peacemaking and peace-keeping issues raised by the Secretary-General in "An Agenda for Peace".
Democratic South Africa rejoins the world community of nations determined to play its role in helping to strengthen the United Nations and to contribute what it can to the furtherance of its purposes. Among other things, we have this morning acceded to the covenants and conventions adopted by this Organization, which address various matters such as economic, social and cultural rights, civil and political rights, and the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination, to say nothing of our irrevocable commitment to the realization of the objectives contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
We are determined to play our full part in all processes that address the important question of the non-proliferation and elimination of weapons of mass destruction. Our Government has also decided to become a signatory to the Convention on prohibition and restrictions on the use of certain conventional weapons.
In a similar vein, we shall not be found wanting in the quest for sustainable development that is in keeping with the Rio de Janeiro Declaration on Environment and Development as well as with Agenda 21.
Equally, our own national interest dictates that we join forces with the United Nations and all its Member States in the common struggle to contain and end the traffic in narcotics.
Even in constitutional terms, we are committed to the advancement of the objective of the emancipation of women through the creation of a non-sexist society. Apart from anything else, we are therefore actively engaged in the preparations for what we are convinced will be a successful Beijing Conference.
We are part of the region of southern Africa and the continent of Africa. As members of the Southern African Development Community and the Organization of African Unity (OAU), and an equal partner with other Member States, we will play our role in the struggles of these organizations to build a continent and a region that will help to create for themselves and all humanity a common world of peace and prosperity.
Ours must become a continent free of such tragedies as those that have afflicted our own country as well as Rwanda, Somalia, Angola, Mozambique, the Sudan and Liberia. Happily, the OAU is actively addressing the issues of peace and stability on our continent.
We are greatly encouraged that the countries of our region, faced with a crisis in Lesotho, acted together speedily and, with the cooperation of the Government and the people of that country, succeeded in demonstrating that together we have the will to defend democracy, peace and national reconciliation.
Furthermore, as members of the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77, we are committed especially to the promotion of South-South cooperation and to the strengthening of the voice of the poor and disadvantaged in the ordering of world affairs.
We would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the members of the General Assembly for the speed and readiness with which they accepted the credentials of democratic South Africa, enabling us to participate in the work of the last General Assembly. We are pleased to note that this same spirit characterized the approach of other international organizations towards our new democracy, including the Commonwealth and the European Union.
We would like to close by congratulating you, Mr. President, on your election to your high post, and we express our confidence that you will guide the work of the Assembly with the wisdom and sense of purpose for which we admire you.
The millions across our globe who stand expectant at the gates of hope look to this Organization to bring them peace, to bring them life, to bring them a life worth living.
We pray that the new South Africa, which the General Assembly helped bring into being and so warmly welcomed among the community of nations, will, in its own and in the wider interest, make its own contribution, however small, to the realization of those hopes.
Our common humanity and the urgency of the knock on the door of this great edifice demand that we must attempt even the impossible.
On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the Republic of South Africa for the statement he has just made.
Mr. Nelson Rorihlahla Mandela, President of the Republic of South Africa, was escorted from the General Assembly Hall.
Mr. Vílchez Asher (Nicaragua), Vice-President, took the Chair.
Tentative Programme of Work
I should like to draw the attention of the General Assembly to document A/INF/49/5, which contains a tentative programme of work and a tentative schedule of plenary meetings for the month of October. I should like to point out that this schedule was prepared to facilitate the organization of the work of delegations and to help ensure that the relevant documentation is ready for the discussion of the items in question.
The lists of speakers for all the items listed in document A/INF/49/5 are now open.
In due course the President will announce the dates of the consideration of other agenda items and keep the Assembly informed of any additions or changes.
Agenda item 9 (continued)
General debate
The next speaker is the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Hungary, His Excellency Mr. László Kovács.
Allow me to extend to Mr. Amara Essy my delegation's warmest congratulations upon his election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session. He may rest assured that the Hungarian delegation stands ready to assist him in carrying out his responsible tasks. Sincere words of recognition should also go to Ambassador Insanally, the outgoing President, for the outstanding and forward-looking manner in which he conducted the work of the previous session of the Assembly.
As a representative of the newly elected coalition Government of the Republic of Hungary, may I be permitted first to assure this Assembly of nations that in its foreign policy Hungary will continue to serve the cause of international peace and stability, with special regard to the Central European region. We are committed to further developing our political and economic transformation in order to consolidate democracy and stabilize the market economy in Hungary.
Our foreign policy rests on three closely interrelated main pillars, which we treat on an equal footing. First, we are determined to promote the full integration of Hungary into the Euro-Atlantic institutions. Secondly, we seek genuine good-neighbourly relations with all the countries in our region, especially with countries bordering ours. And, thirdly, we advocate respect for human rights, with particular emphasis on the minority rights of the millions of Hungarians who live beyond our borders. All in all, we intend to conduct our foreign policy in a most pragmatic and realistic manner and will act accordingly in our bilateral relations and in multilateral forums as well.
On the threshold of the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations, and in the present post-cold-war era, mankind is facing enormous challenges. The euphoria we felt and the great expectations we entertained only yesterday, when a new and promising world seemed to be emerging, have now taken on a bitter quality.
As the bipolar world was falling apart and freedom and democracy were sweeping across the globe we had to recognize some negative aspects of those fundamental changes, such as the outbreak of violent nationalism and ethnic hatred fed by economic and social tensions. The international community, and notably the United Nations, has proved sometimes unable - and on a number of occasions its Member States unwilling - to meet the dramatic challenges of our times.
New and violent manifestations of intolerance, which caught the world unprepared, aggressive wars and bloody ethnic conflicts accompanied by crimes against humanity and the abhorrent practice of "ethnic cleansing" are today unanimously considered issues that ought to have been tackled in a timely and resolute way. It is with deep regret that we note that the United Nations, together with other relevant international organizations, instead of preventing the outbreak of crises in a number of areas of the world, has, rather, been trying to react to them, either without the necessary determination or by belated action. Indisputably, the means available to the Organization for coming to grips with the many international problems were stretched far beyond existing capacities. We believe, however, that the time has come to take a good hard look at the role the United Nations is called upon to play and to devise new ways and means by which it can fulfil its raison d'ętre in our troubled contemporary world.
We therefore reinforce our support for the Secretary-General's Agenda for Peace and continue to regard it as a forward-oriented plan of action for the years to come. In this regard, we consider that special efforts should be made to resolve the problems facing United Nations peace-keeping operations, with a view to improving their efficiency and capability.
In the event we are unable to find adequate answers to our failures and missed opportunities, we may well be on the verge of losing the precious benefits we have gained and the potential prospects that opened up at the end of the cold war for the international community, including the United Nations, to create a qualitatively new, cooperative world order.
As has often been stated, we live in a time of great contrasts that are also reflected at the United Nations. We welcome the momentous results and encouraging progress in South Africa just outlined by His Excellency President Nelson Mandela, as well as those in the Middle East. The assumption of office by the first democratically elected President and Government of South Africa and its normalization of relations with its neighbours, the signing of the Declaration of Principles by Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the beginning of its implementation, the breakthrough in relations between Jordan and Israel and the hopeful evolution of talks between Syria and Israel, are all truly historic achievements and bode well for the future.
The forthcoming 1995 Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons will be an event of cardinal importance which can further enhance the aforesaid positive tendencies. Hungary is keenly interested in ensuring the indefinite and unconditional extension of the Treaty and is ready to contribute to achieving this important goal. Recent events have once again reinforced our conviction with regard to the critical significance of such an act.
If the United Nations wants to live up to the promising processes, it must, first of all, adjust itself to the new realities. It would, therefore, do well to get rid of outdated, anachronistic resolutions which have nothing more to do with present-day developments.
It must, however, be admitted that attempts to tackle crises in the former Yugoslavia, in Somalia, in Rwanda and elsewhere have not yielded conclusive evidence of the ability of the United Nations to find the right answers to major hotbeds of tension.
Because of its geographical proximity, Hungary has followed with particularly grave concern the devastation and suffering across its southern borders, first and foremost in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Croatia. We have supported to the best of our abilities the efforts of the international community aimed at finding a just solution to that human drama. The basis for the solution of this unprecedented crisis in the heart of Europe exists. The principles of the United Nations Charter and those adopted by the International Conference on Yugoslavia are there. They include respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of countries, the inadmissibility of acquisition of territory by force, the elimination of the consequences of "ethnic cleansing", the return of refugees and displaced persons and the protection of human rights, including the rights of minorities. These principles should never be ignored if we are to reach a just and lasting settlement in Bosnia, Croatia and elsewhere.
Hungary has a vital stake in the restoration of peace and international legality in the former Yugoslavia. The volatile situation of the sizeable Hungarian ethnic community in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), the interruption of traditionally close economic ties with our southern neighbours, the serious losses we have suffered as a consequence of the sanctions regime imposed by the Security Council on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, all inspire us towards an active involvement in the search for a durable and equitable settlement in those tortured lands. In achieving that goal we expect the international community to uphold the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and to enforce the relevant resolutions of the Security Council. We also expect that appropriate ways will be found in the course of post-conflict peace-building there to alleviate the burden of losses incurred as a result of the sanctions regime by the countries most directly affected, such as Hungary.
Hungary is following with keen interest the encouraging process of the revitalization of the United Nations. In this respect, I wish to reaffirm that we attach particular importance to the question of the reform of the Security Council with a view to ensuring its transparency, representative character and effective functioning, in order to better reflect the realities of our contemporary world. In this context we fully concur with others in supporting permanent membership in the Security Council for Germany and Japan.
Hungary welcomes the ever-growing recognition that in maintaining international peace and security regional organizations should be given a more decisive role. In our view, the time has come to work out the necessary arrangements whereby regional organizations can effectively contribute to conflict resolution, namely, preventive diplomacy, peace-keeping, peacemaking and post-conflict peace-building. We endorse the proposition that by involving the regional organizations under the umbrella of the United Nations, and in particular of the Security Council, in the safeguarding or restoration of international peace and security, our world can indeed be made a much safer place. We, for our part, are prepared to share in efforts at securing wider participatory action.
This autumn Hungary is honoured to act as host in Budapest of the next Review Conference and summit meeting of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). We expect the Conference and the summit meeting not only to contribute to the better functioning of this important regional arrangement but also to serve as a useful vehicle in the efforts towards a democratic and integrated Europe where rationalism may prevail over nationalism. Furthermore, we are convinced that success within the CSCE is not only beneficial to the peoples living in the CSCE region but that it can also underpin efforts at conflict prevention and crisis resolution in other parts of the world. In this context we believe that the realization of the Dutch-German proposal to establish a genuine and practical division of responsibilities between the CSCE and the United Nations in the settlement of conflicts within the CSCE region, while upholding the principles and provisions embodied in the relevant chapters of the United Nations Charter, could well be a major step forward.
Following the Budapest Summit, when Hungary is to take over for a year the duties of the chairmanship-in-office of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), I personally intend to pay particular attention to the consolidation of mutually advantageous cooperation between the CSCE and the United Nations which is so promisingly unfolding.
Promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms are a high priority of Hungary's foreign policy. In this connection, I would like to recall that in the Vienna Declaration of the World Conference on Human Rights it was solemnly stated that the promotion and protection of all human rights is a legitimate concern of the international community. Consequently, we find it indispensable that, in this spirit, the United Nations should act in the defence of human rights, irrespective of where violations of those rights occur.
In our world of interdependence and growing interaction, Hungary calls for the development by the United Nations of an integrated response-capacity to combat the repeated waves of human rights violations. We view with serious concern the alarming increases in the reported cases of gross violations of human rights, as well as the frequent occurrence of such violations in situations of internal armed conflicts or ethnic strife. These developments have serious repercussions affecting peace, security and stability in the given region and beyond. In this regard, we should be mindful of the requirements laid down in the Vienna Declaration for all Governments to promote and protect human rights in their own countries, regardless of their political, economic and cultural structures. On the one hand, an open and active dialogue, simultaneously constructive and critical, needs to be established and sustained in order to promote the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. On the other hand, a stronger commitment to economic and social development in various areas of the world would considerably facilitate the observance of these universal values.
By the same token, we believe that the United Nations has not yet exhausted the means available for the international protection of human rights. We urge the international community to seek new and innovative means and methods to safeguard the rights and freedoms of our fellow human beings, wherever they may live. We wish to see the United Nations embark in a timely manner - within the framework of preventive diplomacy - upon the road of international protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Rather than responding only to reported human rights violations, the United Nations should build effective preventive mechanisms into its activities whenever the need arises. The notion of preventive protection should also include adequate international monitoring.
Following decisions of the competent organs of the United Nations, such as the Security Council or the Commission on Human Rights, civilian human rights monitors could be deployed if in any part of the world the human rights situation so warranted. Hungary, for its part, is prepared to participate with monitors in joint actions of the international community in this field.
In these endeavours, we also count on the effective participation of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The High Commissioner has had our full support ever since he assumed his office, and we pledge our cooperation in the carrying out of all aspects of his mandate. We would like to reiterate that adequate financing of the human rights activities of the United Nations should be ensured through the regular budget.
I cannot conclude without mentioning the issue of sustainable development, with its many aspects covering industrial and agricultural development, trade, human resources, regional cooperation, protection of the environment, and so forth. Clearly, what is at stake here is our ability to tackle these global issues without delay. The growing sensitivity with regard to these questions cannot but be welcome. We consider the work of the United Nations Conference on Population and Development, held recently in Cairo, to be an important step in that direction at a time when contrasts between requirements of human development and limited resources are becoming more and more evident.
In conclusion, I would like to reaffirm that Hungary continues to be a strong supporter of multilateralism. Nations are looking to this Organization for protection and assistance. We must not let them down in these critical times. In spite of failures, we should keep faith with the United Nations and meet the challenges which, in the final analysis, will determine mankind's destiny in the new millennium.
I now call on the Minister of Commerce of India, His Excellency Shri Pranab Mukherjee.
I congratulate Mr. Amara Essy on his election as President of the General Assembly at the forty-ninth session. We are particularly gratified that an eminent son of Africa is leading the Assembly's deliberations this year.
We offer our thanks to his predecessor, Ambassador Insanally, who presided over a year of considerable activity in the General Assembly with great aplomb and finesse. The Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, will be completing three years in office. We wish him well as he continues to lead the United Nations.
We have already welcomed the new South Africa to the United Nations. South Africa today is a reminder of the triumph of the principle of equality of man - a triumph in which the United Nations played a major role. The world community must commit itself to ensuring that this principle is implemented for all time to come. All efforts should be made for the development of South Africa.
Forty-nine years ago a world tired of war declared that at this foundry of the United Nations it would beat its swords into ploughshares. Instead, we have only produced words, while the swords have not disappeared. The words may be important, but unfortunately they have remained mere words. We seem to be stepping into a new world order in a gaping moral void, with no credible promise of peace nor of a nonviolent world. And we are approaching 1995: the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations; the fortieth anniversary of Panchsheel - the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence; the Year of Tolerance, which is being celebrated by the United Nations; and the one hundred and twenty-fifth birthday of the apostle of peace and moral force, Mahatma Gandhi, whose message only gains in relevance year after year.
Global security today demands a holistic approach involving the promotion of economic and social development; the protection of human rights; the promotion of harmony and social cohesion in multi-racial and multi-ethnic societies; the combating of terrorism, drug-trafficking and clandestine traffic in armaments; and the enhancing of the capacity of the United Nations, within the framework of its Charter, to prevent conflicts, preserve peace and alleviate suffering. The new agenda of the United Nations must be shaped on the basis of this approach, giving peace and development equal priority and treatment. The General Assembly, with its universal participation and comprehensive mandate, should project such a holistic vision and revitalize that vision into action.
The Secretary-General's Agendas have reminded us of what we should focus on, namely, disarmament, development and peace. I put them in that order because true peace can only follow disarmament and development. The cold war was not war, yet certainly not peace. In its wake, we have seen how, most frighteningly, poverty, disease and a host of miseries affect the cause of peace. They had been there all the time, but were not seen by the jaundiced eye of the cold war. In the new post-cold-war context, therefore, the nexus of disarmament and development with peace becomes crystal clear - indeed inescapably clear.
We have to start with disarmament. The slaughter in Rwanda has taken place during the forty-ninth anniversary of the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For almost 50 years, we have lived in fear of general and complete extinction instead of global and complete disarmament. Those who had biological and chemical weapons have given them up under universally binding commitments. We must now go one logical step further and exorcise the greatest evil of all, namely, the weapons of mass destruction.
We have had global discussions on nuclear disarmament before, but now that the cold war, which spawned these weapons, is over, and the previous adversaries have been drawn into a partnership for peace, this is surely the time to agree - in regimes which are global, comprehensive, verifiable and non-discriminatory - on steps to make the world a safer place. Another opportunity will arise when the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) comes up for review next April. We hope that States Parties will use that occasion to refashion the Treaty into a real instrument for global disarmament. Quite apart from the NPT, it is essential that we examine a detailed implementation process of total and global disarmament, which has been accepted in principle, though in words only thus far.
Last June in Cairo, the Foreign Ministers of the non-aligned countries, at India's suggestion, proposed that a fourth special session on disarmament be convened. We think the time and the circumstances are right for the General Assembly to plan for this special session for next year, or as soon as possible.
But disarmament alone will be inadequate. We are rushing towards another precipice, where the disparities in wealth between nations would trigger violent revolution within States. A global convulsion will come if we continue to disregard the development imperative. The problems of development are global problems and must be addressed by all of us. We must set a substantive agenda for development, commit ourselves to it and implement it.
The World Trade Organization, which should soon come into being, must promote what we expected but did not quite achieve so far in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) - non-discrimination, consensus and transparency in the international trade regime. We hope that the multilateral trade negotiations will stimulate economic growth in our countries and in the world economy. It will not if the carefully negotiated consensus, to which we committed ourselves at Marrakesh, is destroyed by the introduction of new conditionalities. Faith in the multilateral system will be shaken if countries use their trading strength and bilateral pressures to weaken and distort agreements to which they have just become parties.
The themes of the World Summit for Social Development focus on the critical issues of poverty eradication together with social integration and the need to increase avenues for productive employment, without which we will not have the broad-based, self-sustaining social and economic development that is the only guarantor of peace and security. If the Summit is to succeed, we must agree upon the commitments for additional resources dedicated to national programmes around the world. We should not be sidetracked from this goal by new concepts which do not command consensus, and do not address the fundamental needs of development.
The United Nations must also re-order its priorities so as to counter several disturbing centrifugal trends which we see emerging. What the world needs is support for the nation-State system on which the United Nations was built. In June this year, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao and President Yeltsin, representing two of the largest pluralistic nations in the world, issued the Moscow Declaration on the Protection of the Interests of Pluralistic States. In this Declaration, which has been circulated as a document of the General Assembly, Russia and India have put forward principles which, if acted upon, will, we think, promote greater harmony in the world.
Against this background, there are a few questions for the Assembly to consider. For the 45 years of the cold war, the Security Council was forced into immobility, but when the cold war ended, it found itself shouldering a stupendous task. As if to make up for years of inactivity, it has rushed into many areas. We must ponder the consequences of the decisions taken over the last few years, which have on occasion sent United Nations peace-keepers in pursuit of objectives whose nexus with peace is rather tenuous.
New doctrines justify armed United Nations intervention under circumstances that are not quite defined - not yet at any rate. These initiatives are well meaning but they do not seem to address the problems from the right end. The ultimate human right is the right to live - the right to food and shelter without which life is impossible. The poverty of many nations makes this a problem to which there are no easy answers. If there are circumstances which justify armed multilateral intervention, by the same logic should not the United Nations have the right to enforce the equitable sharing of resources among nations?
The Non-aligned Movement, at the meeting of its Foreign Ministers in Cairo this year, suggested some guiding principles for peace-keeping operations of enduring significance. All means for the peaceful settlement of disputes chosen by the conflicting parties should be exhausted before coercive measures are considered. Peace-keeping operations should strictly adhere to the principles of the Charter, in particular the principles of full respect for the sovereignty of States, their territorial integrity and non-intervention in their internal affairs. Peace-keeping operations should be considered only at the request of the Member States involved. The resources for peace-keeping activities should not be at the expense of resources for development activities of the United Nations. There should be no hesitation in ending those operations which have been overtaken by events or become inconsistent with their mandates. It is also important to ensure that the distinction between peace-keeping operations and other activities of the United Nations, including humanitarian assistance, is maintained at all times. While coordination between these activities at the field level is important, their integration could irreversibly alter the basic purposes of these distinct activities and detract from their effectiveness.
Prudence must be exercised in the use of regional organizations in peace-keeping operations. It is the capacity of the United Nations for peace-keeping that must be strengthened.
We have responded positively to the Secretary-General's appeal for the strengthening of the United Nations capacity for peace-keeping by designating a brigade for the stand-by arrangements that are being put in place.
It is true that the work of the Security Council and its role in the United Nations are of the greatest importance. There is therefore all the more reason that the Council should be representative of the international community and have maximum legitimacy. The United Nations needs a Council that is effective, but it cannot be effective if the impression grows that it represents entrenched privileges and that its agenda could vary from those of the general membership. The democracy and good governance which are urged upon all States cannot stop at the gates of the United Nations.
The present-day composition of the Security Council reflects the power balance of the immediate post-war period. Since then, the membership of the world body has increased many times over. There is also a greater diffusion of power. To give the Council's actions greater legitimacy, moral authority and political effectiveness, it is imperative to expand the membership of the Council. Developing countries must be included in the category of permanent members to reflect the universal character of the world body. The number of non-permanent seats must also be increased to give Member States greater opportunity for participation in the work of the Council.
A selective, piecemeal expansion of the number of permanent members would not be prudent. The Security Council is not a corporate board, where equity shares determine the voting power, nor can it be likened to the Bretton Woods institutions, which reflect the wealth of nations. The United Nations is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of nations. Its primary objective remains the maintenance of international peace and security. These elements must find expression in the composition of the Council, which must be able to address the challenges of the twenty-first century.
Durability and resilience, rather than expediency, should determine the time frame of any expansion. On the basis of any criteria - population, size of economy, contribution to the maintenance of international peace and security and to peace-keeping or future potential - India deserves to be a permanent member of the Security Council.
The working methods of the Security Council must be reformed to enhance transparency and to express the democratic aspirations of the vast majority of Member States. We hope that the Open-ended Working Group on the question of increase in the membership of the Security Council will duly reflect on these issues in its deliberations next year.
Human rights are the new vogue. The profoundly humanistic traditions of the Indian civilization, with its emphasis on tolerance, harmony, non-violence and the inviolability of the individual, are in-built in our ethos. Several centuries back, an Indian thinker wrote:
"Man is above everything else. Man is the highest truth. There is nothing above man."
All human rights are sacrosanct in India, guaranteed by a secular Constitution, an independent judiciary, a free press, and public opinion vigorously expressed. India's commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights has now received another institutional impetus with the establishment of our National Human Rights Commission, which has begun to function effectively, with its findings published in its annual report. In keeping with our policy of transparency we maintain a sustained dialogue with important non-governmental organizations, which includes affording greater access to them. We have also invited the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to visit India.
It is true that much remains to be done on a worldwide basis to further international cooperation to promote and protect human rights. But the problem must be seen in perspective. In India, for instance, we grapple with the problems of development for 900 million people; in the north-west and in the north-east we face brutal terrorist movements, often supported from abroad, which have killed thousands of innocents, made refugees of hundreds of thousands within India, and threatened our sovereignty and territorial integrity. We will face these problems and defeat them. We welcome the support and advice of friends abroad, but we cannot accept the position that all human rights are a privilege of the terrorists. The rights of innocent and unarmed citizens must be protected. We urge that the question of human rights should not be made into a politically motivated slogan insensitive to the rights of those citizens.
Since the toxin of terrorism is deliberately being spread by some countries - and none of us is immune - the international community must come together to defend itself. Terrorism is fast becoming a means, if not a weapon, of mass destruction. Many countries have suffered and many more could be affected. Terrorists have killed far more people in the last decades than the chemical and biological weapons which we have agreed to ban and destroy. Just as the international community decided that a convention was needed to outlaw those weapons, so it must urgently negotiate a convention to counter and eradicate terrorism. We urge the General Assembly to initiate serious thinking on this subject. The international community must also provide the necessary succour to the victims of terrorism, whose numbers are swelling by the day.
The closing years of the twentieth century will see human society poised at a critical juncture as regards the future. Will the end of the cold war mark the beginnings of a new, more stable global order, of freedom and well-being growing on the soil of cooperation, consensus and mutual respect, or will the world instead revert bit by bit to the mind-set which breeds anarchy and a return to centrifugalism and destruction, to end up once again in the tyranny of imposition and domination? Should we regress to the system of spheres of influence which has led to so many wars over the last two hundred years? These questions have still not been adequately answered.
Many years ago the father of our nation, Mahatma Gandhi, had asked what test should guide human endeavour. His conclusion, after long years of struggling on behalf of India's many dispossessed millions, was as follows:
"I will give you a talisman. Whenever you are in doubt, or when the self becomes too much with you, apply the following test: Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man whom you may have seen, and ask yourself if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him. Will he gain anything by it? Will it restore him to a control over his own life and destiny?"
If the protection afforded to its weak, its most dispossessed, people is the measure of community's worth, as indeed it must be, then the millions of refugees, and the conflict, poverty, hunger and deprivation that afflict so many regions of the world today bear stark testimony to the loss of some vital ethical underpinning. If the world today is to redeem a future that seems increasingly mortgaged to greed and hatred, we must recall once again that it is the nobility of our means, and the ends we pursue, that determine our rewards. Our welfare will be determined only in accordance with the values and principles we abide by.
As Mahatma Gandhi and sages before have taught and practised, truthfulness, charity, compassion, non-violence and treating others as we would wish ourselves to be treated are the values that really stand the test of time. These are the values to be inculcated in our great global Organization, the United Nations, to which we are all committed.
I now call on the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Syrian Arab Republic, His Excellency Mr. Farouk Al-Shara.
I should like to congratulate Mr. Essy on his election to the presidency of the forty-ninth session of the General Assembly and to express our appreciation of the great responsibilities he will be shouldering, together with the Secretary-General, in preparing for the commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations.
I also take this opportunity to salute, on behalf of my country, Syria, the long and arduous struggle of Africa against the system of apartheid in South Africa. This struggle, recently crowned with the establishment of a united, democratic and non-racial Republic of South Africa, is a triumph not only for Africa but also for humanity and the international community as a whole. It is especially a triumph for the United Nations as it is one of its most important achievements. This great accomplishment will remain forever a source of inspiration and optimism for us all that all forms of racism are inevitably doomed to extinction.
The commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations will raise fundamental questions about the role and achievements of the Organization and the obstacles it has faced and continues to face. In our opinion, the most important question will focus on the reform and restructuring of the United Nations to make it more democratic and thus more capable of responding to the major changes that have taken place on the international scene, particularly since the end of the cold war.
It seems that none of the Member States objects in principle to the idea of introducing reforms to the United Nations, including the enlargement of the Security Council's membership. However, the question that could take years before any agreement is reached on it is that which relates to the nature of the required reforms, the criteria for choosing the new members of the Security Council and, first and foremost, the right of veto: whether to expand it or abolish it altogether from the Charter.
More than two-thirds of the current Members of the United Nations did not participate in drafting the Charter of the United Nations, either because they were languishing under colonialism or because, after independence, they were thrust into the cold war, for which the United Nations was an important arena. In this context, developing countries pose the following question: If colonialism is truly a thing of the past and if the cold war is indeed over, what other reasons are there to prevent the developing countries from actively participating in the restructuring of the United Nations and from taking the share they are democratically entitled to in the Security Council's membership?
We hope that the answer will not be a negative one and that the cold war will no longer be waged in new innovative forms and under different pretexts. That would be in no one's interest and would serve no useful purpose, either in the short or in the long term. Today's world, North and South, East and West, faces unparalleled challenges that require the cooperation of all Member States in facing up to them. Those challenges may initially appear to be of a minor nature, but they may well grow and spread like a plague.
In many continents, dozens of civil wars have been spawned from the womb of the cold war. The causes of these wars are many: national, ethnic, religious and tribal. Their victims are hundreds of thousands, while the refugees and displaced persons they uproot are in the tens of millions. The number of those who live below the poverty line in the world today has reached almost one fifth of the inhabitants of the globe. About 90 per cent of those live in developing countries.
A phenomenon that seems truly odd and surprising is the spread of organized crime to countries where such a phenomenon was never known before. Organized crime now has its own international networks, its secret transnational organizations are estimated to be in the thousands. Such organizations have the ability to break the most rigorous of laws by all the illegitimate means available to them, including the smuggling of nuclear components and their scientific designs.
The indispensable international cooperation needed to meet such varied challenges cannot achieve the desired results if certain of its principal parties take to evoking the spirit of the cold war by calling up the past instead of looking forward to the future or if they act under the influence of some racist background that inspires their propaganda or election campaigns. It is no exaggeration to say that such elements and subjective motives have already played a role in obstructing international efforts to address a number of serious crises, particularly those in which human suffering has reached levels that defy description and stymie the imagination, as in the cases of Bosnia, Somalia and Rwanda, not to mention Afghanistan, where the shortsightedness of the conflicting parties has overwhelmed all wisdom and prudence.
On the other hand, however, we must commend the United States of America for resorting to political dialogue with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and with Cuba instead of continuing to pursue its policy of confrontation against them. These are positive measures which we hope will continue and expand to encompass other issues, in the forefront of which is that of Lockerbie disaster and Libya, so that political dialogue will become the most appropriate option inresolving disputes between States. In the same vein, we hope that the United Arab Emirates and Iran will be able, through amicable dialogue, to reach a satisfactory solution to the question of the disputed islands that would preserve the rights of both parties and consolidate friendly relations between the two neighbours.
Syria was one of the first States in the Middle East to sign, as early as 1968, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). In doing so, Syria was prompted by its conviction that the possession of such an overkill weapon by any State in our highly sensitive region would be a major cause for concern, not only to the peoples of the region, but also to the world at large. At the time, Syria expected that its early signing of the NPT would be an incentive to Israel, sooner or later, to sign in turn and would dissuade it from possessing nuclear weapons. Regrettably, we were to discover that our expectations were not justified. Israel, as yet, has neither adhered to the NPT, nor agreed to open its nuclear installations to international inspection.
Once again, and on the occasion of the Paris Conference on Banning of Chemical Weapons in January 1989, Syria took the initiative to call for making the Middle East a region free of all nuclear, chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction within the framework of the United Nations. However, Israel did not respond to this call nor did it respond to any of the calls of the United Nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency or those of the Conferences of the Non-Aligned Movement or the Islamic Conference.
This is an issue that has become of the utmost importance and gravity, particularly in the light of the ongoing peace process in the Middle East. It is not acceptable for any one party to have a privileged or exceptional position at the expense of others in regard to sensitive and decisive matters that relate to regional security which ought to be based on co-equality and mutuality.
The President returned to the Chair.
The forthcoming conference of the States Parties to the NPT scheduled to review the extension of its tenure which is about to expire, affords a rare opportunity for all States in the region to demonstrate their peaceful intentions.
The accession by all States in the Middle East to the NPT is a vital step towards transforming the Middle East to a region free of all weapons of mass destruction. From this rostrum, and in this context, the Syrian Arab Republic calls upon Israel to accede to the NPT and to place its nuclear installations under the inspection of the Atomic Energy Agency so that the States of the region may be able to agree to extending the Treaty. This, if it is done, will be an important step towards the creation of a climate of confidence which in turn will contribute to building peace and security in the Middle East.
Three years have passed since the convening of the Madrid Conference and no just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East has materialized. This is a fact that cannot be cancelled out by the achievement of some progress on some tracks.
Our region is the cradle of human civilization and monotheistic religions. Succeeding generations of its peoples have become accustomed to repel invaders. It is time for the region to enjoy peace and stability. This cannot be achieved through half-measure solutions or through the trickle down of droplets of peace, nor can it be achieved through agreements which encroach on the national dignity or compromise the interests of a nation.
Syria accepted the initiative of the United States in which the United States undertook to work towards the achievement of a just and comprehensive peace in the region, on the basis of international legality, Security Council resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and 425 (1978) and the land-for-peace formula including a political solution to the question of the national rights of the Palestinian people. The United States also confirmed that in pursuance of its previous positions rejecting the extension of Israeli law to the Syrian Golan Heights, it did not agree to the annexation of any part of the territories occupied in 1967.
In the light of the complexities of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the suspicions of the Arab parties regarding Israel's intentions, Syria took two important decisions which complemented one another.
The first decision was our commitment to coordinate with the Arab parties participating in the peace process. This was prompted by our conviction that the other Arab parties would benefit from such solidarity as well as from the position of Syria and its various potentialities. We are also convinced that the comprehensiveness of the solution would be a guarantee to all parties should they respond to the requirements of peace.
The second decision was that the peace option was a strategic one. By so doing we misled no one: neither our own people nor any of the others, as to the truth of our intentions, so that they may act accordingly.
In this context, we were absolutely convinced that these two important decisions were going to be in the interest of all parties participating in the peace process. These two decisions, we believed, would also facilitate the task of the two sponsors, the United States and the Russian Federation, in achieving full peace in the region in return for full withdrawal from the Arab territories occupied in 1967.
Regrettably, the peace process did not continue on the right track towards achieving its desired objective. There are many reasons for that. However, we see no point in elaborating on them now. Nor do we want to digress and elaborate on the current position of those parties which have strayed from Arab coordination. Suffice it to refer to an essential point that was revealed in their public statements. The point is that they have now begun to question the usefulness of what they have done. The fact is they have become unable to contribute to the achievement of a just and comprehensive peace in the region.
In fact, the optimistic trumpetings by Israel about great progress achieved in the peace process is not true, except from Israel's point of view. The agreements reached so far have achieved nothing but what Israel wanted from the land-for-peace formula while the Arab party that signed those agreements with Israel still awaits Israel's response to its demands.
The most important characteristic of Syria's policy under the leadership of President Hafez al-Assad, is the reconciling of principle and reality. Principles that cannot survive on the ground are bound to decline. On the other hand, living the reality without adhering to one's principles leads to decline.
Syria wants peace, and realizes that all parties have a stake in this peace. It realizes also that peace has objective requirements, and it is prepared to fulfil those requirements that are agreed upon. Syria means what it says and adheres to what it means. The land-for-peace equation must be implemented in both its parts. The return of the entire Golan is not open to compromise, unjustified delay or a misplaced testing of intentions. On this basis, Syria supports a genuine peace - a peace that lives and flourishes without artificial obstacles or arbitrary conditions. Putting on the peace process a greater burden than it can bear does not help to achieve peace; rather, it poses a threat to the process. The peace process should not be weighed down with issues that fall outside its framework.
It is regrettable that, as a result of its strong influence on the media, Israel has managed to distort information and turn facts on their head, to the extent that those in some circles of Western public opinion now claim that Syria used the Golan Heights to launch offensives against the Israelis, whereas, in fact, the opposite was the case. Israel uses the pretext of security in an attempt to justify its occupation of the Golan Heights and its refusal to withdraw therefrom. It was Israel, not Syria, that started the armed clashes in the period between 1949 and 1967.
United Nations records and resolutions on this matter adopted by the Security Council during that period will demonstrate beyond the shadow of a doubt that Israel was responsible for opening fire for the purpose of expelling Syrian farmers from their land and preventing them from reaping their harvest. It was natural that the Syrian side should have defended its own citizens and land by responding every time they were fired upon.
The records to which I have referred are supported by memoirs published by senior United Nations officers who were entrusted with the task of supervising the truce between Syria and Israel during that period. Among those officers are General Odd Bull and General Karl van Horn. Hills and mountains are no obstacle to today's sophisticated weapons. In any case, the Golan Heights are directly opposite the Galilee Mountains, which are within Israel and are higher than the Golan Heights.
Anyway, whether or not the Israeli public are aware of the truth of what I have just said, the United Nations Charter states the basic principle of the non-acquisition of territory by force. This principle has been confirmed in many Security Council resolutions. The current peace process cannot be completed without Israel's withdrawing from the entire Syrian Golan and southern Lebanon.
We believe that our position is just. We have a right that we shall never relinquish. As President Assad has said,
"Relinquishing any part of a nation's territory amounts to relinquishing the entire country and its people's free will."
We want a just peace that restores everyone's legitimate right - the comprehensive peace after which the peoples of the region aspire and under which they will be able to enjoy security, stability and prosperity.
I now call on the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea, His Excellency Mr. Han Sung-Joo.
May I congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session. I am convinced that your vast experience and your leadership will contribute greatly to the success of the session. At the same time, I wish to acknowledge the excellent work of your predecessor, Ambassador Samuel R. Insanally of Guyana, during the last session of the General Assembly.
I should like also to pay tribute to the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for his dedication to the cause of the United Nations.
The evolution of the world scene since the last session confirms that we live in an age of historic transition. The encouraging developments in South Africa and in the Middle East confirm that conventional paradigms of the international system are changing. Nations have become so interdependent that force can no longer act as the final arbiter. In relations between nations, rules, agreements and civilized norms have come into play as much as traditional regulators.
Until the modern era we lived in what might be called a Hobbesian world, where conflict, rather than cooperation, was the defining characteristic of relations between nations. Basically, international relations were regulated through the mechanism of the balance of power. Sometimes we had the hegemony of one Power, and sometimes several Powers acting in concert, but these were only variations of what was essentially a struggle for power, a struggle for domination.
Then, in the early part of this century, came the Wilsonian vision, which called for a global organization. To this vision we owe the United Nations. After the Second World War - even at the height of the cold war - mankind envisaged a bolder world. The vision of a global welfare was presented, for example, by the Swedish scholar Gunnar Myrdal, who urged us to move "beyond the welfare state".
Now, at the end of the twentieth century, the demise of the cold war offers us yet another vision of a new world. The old order based on force is losing its grip on international relations. Gone are the days when defects in the balance of power necessarily invited ambition or adventure. The days of expansive and proselytizing ideologies have passed. A new order based on peaceful accord, cooperation and interdependence is emerging.
Mr. Touré (Guinea-Bissau), Vice-President took the Chair.
This can best be characterized as a non-zero-sum global society. In today's world no country can remain unaffected by the havoc of another, whether caused by hunger, tyranny, environmental pollution or the proliferation of weapons. Similarly, every country can benefit from world prosperity, world peace and a cleaner world environment. This new world, if successful in addressing thorny issues such as the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, will allow us to escape from the age-old security dilemma.
What can we do to solve such critical impending problems as poverty, pollution, population, national conflicts, oppression and the arms race? Most of all, we need shared values and common purposes. We first need a sound understanding of the nature of these new problems. We must recognize that these are problems that affect us all and require our concerted efforts.
In this new era genuine world peace cannot be achieved without our properly addressing the issues of social and economic development.
My delegation welcomes the report of the Secretary-General on an agenda for development as a timely and appropriate initiative. His report has moved the United Nations to the foreground of discussions on development.
Given the importance of the political will of nations in this endeavour, the United Nations system as a whole should play a leading role by serving as a forum for nations to work out remedies for economic and social problems which undermine peace and security in many parts of the world. We hope that the current General Assembly session will provide a much needed opportunity for more serious discussion on these vital issues. Taking advantage of its recent experience in development, the Republic of Korea will make its full contribution to the effort for global economic and social development.
In June this year a variety of issues on development were discussed at the World Hearings on Development. At these Hearings special emphasis was placed on human-centred development, the interrelationship between peace and development and the need for strengthening international cooperation. I hope that a concrete action programme will be worked out, based on the informative views presented at the Hearings and at the high-level segment of the 1994 substantive session of the Economic and Social Council.
Our past experience has taught us that social development and economic growth are inseparable. Meaningful social progress necessarily includes substantial economic growth. At the same time, the substance of social development - the promotion of social welfare, equitable redistribution and the protection of the environment - is crucial for sustainable economic growth. In this context, I am convinced that the World Summit for Social Development, to be held in Copenhagen next year, will set a new landmark in the field of social development by producing effective and feasible action plans.
Economic and social development is closely linked with environmental issues. During the past four decades the world population has doubled, while the global economy has grown eightfold. For the first time the Earth has begun to feel the heavy strains of human activity. It has become evident that the planet can no longer keep up with the pace of its exploitation. A balance must be struck, and harmony sought, between the environment and development.
Two years ago the United Nations took a most important initiative by holding the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. We should uphold the goal set by this conference: environmentally sound and sustainable development. To achieve this goal, the advanced countries should play a leading role in protecting the environment. Support should be given to developing countries in the form of financial contributions and the transfer of environmentally-sound technology. Developing countries, for their part, should make efforts commensurate with their capabilities.
As a member of the Commission on Sustainable Development, the Republic of Korea has actively participated in formulating global regimes for the environment. We have joined international environmental agreements and contributed to the Global Environment Facility (GEF). My Government will continue its efforts and cooperation to attain both development and a better environment.
Today we are witnessing a massive exodus of people in many parts of the world, the consequence of armed conflict and natural disasters.
We are pleased that the United Nations capacity to provide humanitarian assistance has been strengthened through close coordination between its relevant bodies. However, appeals for urgently needed resources are usually met with a fraction of the targeted figures, thereby seriously hampering the effective implementation of humanitarian programmes. Once again, we need generous assistance from the entire international community.
I am happy to report that, thanks to the recent public campaigns organized by the Government and various non-governmental organizations in Korea, the Korean public has been alerted to the importance of humanitarian assistance. This is demonstrated by the fact that we have been sending financial aid, medical personnel and supplies to such troubled spots as Rwanda.
On human rights, more than a year has elapsed since the Vienna World Conference on this important subject was held in 1993. My Government is encouraged to see that some of the provisions in its Programme of Action have already been implemented.
Since last year the Korean Government has been pursuing in earnest a policy that we call "new diplomacy", which emphasizes the universal values of human rights, welfare, liberty and democracy. Currently we are preparing to become a party to the Convention against Torture, and last July the Third United Nations Workshop for the Asia-Pacific Region on Human Rights Issues was held in Seoul. Among the outcomes of the Workshop was acceptance of our proposal to hold the Workshop on a regular basis. That agreement is an expression of the collective will of all the Asia-Pacific countries, which has helped us to move one step closer to the ultimate establishment of a regional human rights institution.
Another critical task for global peace and security is preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, both nuclear and biochemical. Most urgently, we must deal with the problem of nuclear proliferation. The Republic of Korea supports the indefinite extension of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) at the Review and Extension Conference in 1995. The Treaty has made an enormous contribution to international security as the mainstay of the non-proliferation regime. The legitimacy of the NPT should be reinforced through renewed efforts on the part of the nuclear Powers and through increased international cooperation for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. At the same time, the effectiveness of the NPT regime should be enhanced by strengthening the safeguards system of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The negotiations for a comprehensive test-ban Treaty (CTBT) at the Conference on Disarmament are also very important. A universal and verifiable CTBT will undoubtedly serve as a major instrument in strengthening the non-proliferation regime and advancing nuclear disarmament. The recent changes in the world order require a rationalization of disarmament agendas and new working methods. The multilateral disarmament frameworks must meet these requirements. In view of the ever-increasing importance of the Conference on Disarmament as a negotiating forum, its membership should be expanded.
In keeping with the spirit of the United Nations Charter, efforts for disarmament and security measures should also be encouraged on the regional level. In this regard, the Republic of Korea welcomes the productive discussions on confidence-building measures at the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum last July in Bangkok. A security dialogue for the North-East Asian subregion would complement this region-wide framework.
A major challenge to the NPT regime is the North Korean nuclear problem, which poses a serious threat not only to the Korean peninsula, but also to the Asian-- Pacific region and the world as a whole. The suspicions surrounding the North Korean nuclear programme should be completely cleared by securing transparency of its nuclear activities, past and future, as well as the present. For this, North Korea should fully cooperate with the IAEA in the implementation of the safeguards agreement and implement the Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
If North Korea fulfils its obligations in good faith, we will do all we can to assist the DPRK in the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Depending on the resolution of the nuclear issue, the Republic of Korea stands ready to make its technological and capital resources available for North Korea's overall economic development in the spirit of mutual prosperity.
The post-cold-war international situation presents us with opportunities for a new world as well as multiple challenges to our efforts for peace and development. Therefore, it is all the more imperative that the role of the United Nations be increased.
One of the most remarkable changes in the aftermath of the cold war is the strengthened role of the United Nations in peace-keeping. As regional conflicts have come to replace the bipolar confrontation of the cold war, United Nations peace-keeping operations have expanded dramatically, both in number and mandate.
Given the limited resources for United Nations peace-keeping activities, more effort should be made for the effective use of preventive diplomacy. The decisions on United Nations involvement in actual conflicts should be made selectively and with proper priorities. Continued efforts should also be made to address the modality of intervention and the means of securing the necessary resources.
The Republic of Korea remains firmly committed to United Nations peace-keeping activities. As part of its ongoing support, the Republic of Korea sent an engineering unit to Somalia last year. Last month we dispatched a medical unit to Western Sahara, and in a few days Korean military observers will arrive in Georgia. Korea also plans to join United Nations efforts to arrange stand-by forces.
The new diplomacy of my Government puts emphasis on globalism. Through active engagement in global affairs, Korea seeks to play its due role within the United Nations framework. It is in this vein that the Republic of Korea has presented its candidature for a seat on the Security Council for the 1996-1997 term. We look forward to the encouragement and support of other Member States for this effort.
We support reform of the United Nations. Reforms are needed in order better to cope with the new challenges faced by the world body. As United Nations membership has increased from 51 in 1945 to 184 in 1994, an enlargement of the Council seems in order. The key question is how to increase the number of seats without compromising the Security Council's effectiveness. Creation of a third category of Council members, coupled with the expansion of non-permanent membership, may be an answer.
For the United Nations fully to assume its role in the new international environment, its financial difficulties should be duly addressed. It is also imperative that the efficiency of the Organization and its management be enhanced to guarantee the effective use of available resources. In this regard, my delegation welcomes the establishment of the Office of Internal Oversight Services, and looks forward to the active role of the newly-appointed Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Services.
The Republic of Korea feels a particular sense of affinity with the United Nations. Both Korea and the United Nations were born in the wake of the Second World War. Upon creation, both entertained great expectations: the United Nations hoped for global peace; Korea hoped for national integrity and prosperity. They both experienced disappointment, however, as their expectations were crushed by conflict and division: the cold war and East-West division for the United Nations; the Korean War and South-North division for Korea.
Now, at last, the United Nations has risen from its unhappy past with new hopes; the world body is no longer held hostage to the paralysing cold war vetoes. The Republic of Korea has also overcome socio-political difficulties and economic underdevelopment. But the division on the Korean peninsula still remains. It is the ardent wish, and also a firm belief, of the Korean people that the shackles of national division will soon be broken as the South and the North work together in the spirit of reconciliation and cooperation.
My country's unique relationship with the United Nations makes the upcoming fiftieth anniversary all the more meaningful to us. The National Committee of the Republic of Korea for the Fiftieth Anniversary of the United Nations was established last April. This Committee is preparing a number of programmes, with special emphasis on enhancing the awareness of the role of the United Nations among the new generation. We also plan to actively participate in the programmes sponsored by the United Nations. In this regard, I am pleased to note that a leading Korean corporation is participating as a global sponsor in the preparation for the United Nations fiftieth anniversary.
Next year the United Nations will celebrate its golden anniversary. It will be an occasion for us all to be reminded once again of the goals set forth in the Charter of the United Nations. The new world which was envisaged by the founding fathers of this body is yet to take shape. But we must be aware that we now stand at a critical juncture in history, and that a rare opportunity has been handed to us.
We have to reach for a peaceful and prosperous world based on interdependence and cooperation between nations. Success will depend on our ability to understand the nature of the new global environment, which is fundamentally different from the old one, and on our determination to meet the challenge.
We have to associate ourselves with the forces that will shape the future. United, and only by being united, can we build and thrive in this new world society.
The meeting rose at 1.30 p.m.