Mr. Essy Cote d'Ivoire president
In the absence of the President, Mr. Biegman (Netherlands), Vice-President, took the Chair.
The meeting was called to order at 3.10 p.m.
Agenda item 10 (continued)
Report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization (A/49/1)
Our congratulations go to the President, Mr. Essy, who assumed the presidency at a significant juncture in the evolution of the functioning of the United Nations. The discussions on the report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization (A/49/1) provide a particularly opportune occasion for us to share our vision of the United Nations as we approach its fiftieth anniversary and as we move ever closer to the twenty-first century.
At the outset, I would like to place on record my Government's deep appreciation for the leadership and drive that Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali has provided to the functioning of the United Nations. His deep understanding of the problems that face the international community at this critical juncture in its history are a great asset. We applaud his efforts in attempting to provide a new vision for the United Nations, keeping in view the individual complexities that abound in Member States and the need for consensus decision-making.
The report of the Secretary-General has been painstakingly produced. In his very opening remarks, the Secretary-General has sought to correct the impression that the United Nations as an Organization is dedicated primarily to peace-keeping. He stresses that the United Nations is deepening its attention to the foundations of peace, which lie in the realm of development. We in India have been concerned at the imbalance that created the impression referred to by the Secretary-General, and we firmly believe that the new agenda of the United Nations must give peace and development equal priority and treatment. It will be recalled that in his statement at the 14th meeting, on 3 October 1994, the leader of the Indian delegation to the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session stressed that with its universal participation and comprehensive mandate, the General Assembly should approach such a holistic vision and revitalize that vision into action.
As we debate the report of the Secretary-General in the perspective of the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations and the approach of the twenty-first century, we should perhaps first dwell upon the challenges that we are likely to carry from the past into the twenty-first century. An understanding of these challenges is critical to the new role that we envisage for the United Nations. The United Nations is constituted of sovereign nation-States and the challenge they face on the path of nation-building, based on pluralism, is first and foremost the massive challenge of development. Failure to meet this challenge would mean greater inequality and poverty, which would only breed further tension. The other major challenges are care for the environment, the threat to the unity and peace of nation-States and fundamentalist fanaticism traceable to causes unrelated to religion.
The Secretary-General's annual report makes a valiant effort to address the challenges to which I have referred. The position of my Government on the issues involved and the methodology for addressing these challenges was spelt out in some detail in the statement of the leader of the Indian delegation in the general debate on 3 October 1994.
The efforts made by my Government to adapt to the historic changes that have taken place in the world during the past few years have focused on adapting available positive ideas, processes and technologies to India's specific requirements. In doing so, we do not intend to forget our own traditions and our own special circumstances. The challenges are common, but uniform solutions, to be successfully implemented, keeping in view considerations of equity, must necessarily take cognizance of national situations.
Solutions must also be flexible. As the Prime Minister of India once described it:
"In India we recognize the change but maintain a balance, which has come to be known as the middle way."
We believe that at this United Nations we must find a "collective middle way" that reflects the genius of our individual traditions and is consistent with the need for rapid economic development, modernity and sustained peace.
The United Nations is today involved in attempting to keep the peace in different parts of the world. In the absence of a common vision in the post-cold-war era, its experiences in this domain have been mixed. In spite of the end of the cold war, the perception persists that, somehow, balance-of-power considerations continue to impact on decision-making at the United Nations. The notions of balance of power and the retention of exclusive rights for the militarily and economically dominant States are still preponderant. It is still being argued by some leading analysts that a new world order will have to emerge, much as it did in the past century, from a reconciliation and balancing of competing national interests. It is regrettable that such perceptions not only exist but continue to influence the activities of the international community. For the international community to succeed in the imperative of maintaining international peace and security, it must be ensured that the purposes and principles set forth in the United Nations Charter are adhered to, not only by Member States, but by the Organization itself and its specialized agencies.
I have chosen to address the report of the Secretary-General in philosophical terms, for I believe that our debate on his report provides us with yet another opportunity to learn from our past mistakes and to focus the United Nations on a direction that would enable us together to establish a new world order characterized by true equity, peace and prosperity for all peoples and nations.
Before I conclude, I should like to associate my delegation with the statement made earlier today by Indonesia on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement.
I would like to extend the grateful thanks of the Sri Lanka delegation to the Secretary-General for his report on the work of the Organization. Last year's report was described by the Secretary-General himself as "the longest report...to the General Assembly...in many years" (A/48/l, para.26). I would like to describe this year's report as a comprehensive and well-conceived account of the multifarious and far-reaching activities of the Organization at a particularly complex time in its evolution.
The Chairman of the Non-Aligned Movement, speaking on behalf of the non-aligned countries, has made an analysis of the Secretary-General's report on the work of the Organization, with which my delegation, in general, agrees.
As the introduction to the report indicates, the Secretary-General has sought to shift the Organization's focus away from a primary emphasis on post-cold-war political priorities to a more fundamental, if less dramatic, focus on development concerns. The emphasis on development is not one which ignores or shies away from political realities. In fact the Secretary-General seeks to delve into the root causes of political instability --
"deepening...attention to the foundations of peace, which lie in the realm of development". (A/49/1, para.1)
The report covers the full gamut of the United Nations global and regional involvement -- development activities, social and humanitarian concerns, the protection of human rights, preventive diplomacy, peacemaking, peace-keeping, peace-building, disarmament, and so on. What is of particular importance to my delegation is that each of these specific areas should not be considered as separate entities to be approached in isolation. We see all these issues as interconnected and intrinsically related to the Organization's ultimate goal: the welfare of humanity in all its dimensions. In his report, the Secretary-General himself identifies five development dimensions which he sees as functioning together in an interlocking and mutually reinforcing manner. These are peace, the economy, the environment, society and democracy -- parts of a whole.
These are all aspects of critical importance to every State. However, the United Nations is perhaps of greater relevance to smaller developing countries which are more vulnerable to the fallout from the immense changes that are still taking place. These countries need to rely heavily on the United Nations, including at the most basic level, to preserve their independence and sovereignty and to protect them from unsolicited external intervention.
Small countries are not merely subjective recipients of the benefits of the United Nations. In a real way, by their active participation in the work of the Organization, they contribute to the common purposes and principles of the Charter. In a world in which interdependence has moved from an abstraction to a reality, a reality which we are all being forced to accept, the function of the United Nations as a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations has become even more central. The United Nations remains a parliament to which all sovereign national units of the human family need to belong. In this situation, the Security Council plays very much the role of a cabinet as in a functioning parliamentary democracy.
Interest in the work of the Security Council, and indeed of membership in it, stems not only from apprehensions that small States may be left out of vital decisions affecting their people. The United Nations, more than at any other time in its history, is not only more deeply involved in its traditional functions but has moved into radically new areas of activity which profoundly affect all States as never before. The Secretary-General's report makes this abundantly clear.
It is in this context that the establishment of the Open-ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation on and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council, acquires special significance. The Secretary-General has noted that although the discussions in the Group were constructive they did not result in concrete recommendations. Nevertheless the message that emanated from the Group is not one that should be ignored. We are glad that the President of the General Assembly has caused the Open-ended Working Group to continue its mandate in the current session as well. We hope that in the Secretary-General's report next year he will be able to report conclusions which will make the Security Council more transparent in methodology, more representative in character, and therefore, in sum, more efficient and effective in its functioning.
Confronted with an increasing case-load of conflicts, the use of the instrument of peace-keeping has grown in frequency, variety, complexity and cost. Some peace-keeping efforts have fully succeeded while others have not. Some have generated controversy. There were also situations in which the peace-keeping efforts failed to materialize in a timely manner. We agree with the Secretary-General that these setbacks should not make us discard this useful tool. However, our experience shows that peace-keeping operations are not an all-embracing panacea. A consultative rather than a prescriptive approach is needed. Action has to be taken selectively and on a case-by-case basis. We therefore agree with the Secretary-General that much can be learned from the setbacks suffered by the current operations in defining a pragmatic policy.
The Secretary-General himself points out that some conflicts simply cannot be managed effectively, let alone resolved solely through the instrument of United Nations peace-keeping. There have also been instances where political interests of individual countries rather than the objective merits of the situation appear to dictate action or inaction. Peace-keeping costs have risen sharply. All Member States are required to share these costs, while decisions on peace-keeping are being taken by a limited number of Member States. This raises the question of accountability and legitimacy. The capacity of the United Nations and its agencies has been stretched to the maximum in coping with their peace-keeping obligations. This has sometimes resulted in the determination of priorities detrimental to the development activities of the United Nations.
The fiftieth anniversary of the Organization will be an appropriate occasion to rededicate the Organization to its indisputable mandate for collective action in promoting development, economic growth and prosperity for all. The World Summit for Social Development, which will take place in the fiftieth anniversary year, will be an opportunity to be grasped. We would therefore hope that the preparatory international debate on the critical questions of development and democratization will move beyond a replay of known positions. The Summit should produce a realistic programme of action which will promote prosperity for all. The trend of democratization sweeping across the globe runs the danger of being reversed if a renewed vision of development is not put into action and the underlying causes of conflict are not addressed. Without development, no enduring foundation for peace and security can be built. In 1995 we must strive to have a creative international consensus without sliding back to the rhetoric of a bygone era.
The financial situation of the United Nations continues to be in crisis. The cash-flow situation remains critical. There is a note of desperation when the Secretary-General states:
"The unpredictability and irregularity of contributions from Member States make it extremely difficult to manage the Organization effectively". (A/49/1, para. 103)
My delegation supports the specific measures outlined in the report to encourage Member States to meet their Charter obligations.
In the interests of time, my delegation will refrain from discussing specific issues such as the Middle East, apartheid and peacemaking, on which positive developments have been reported by the Secretary-General.
There are several other issues also which threaten the efficient functioning of the United Nations. My delegation will reserve comment on such matters for the relevant agenda items.
In a rapidly changing international scene, it is difficult to foresee much of the future. But as the Secretary-General states:
"The extraordinary challenges and possibilities of this moment in time require the most dedicated and far-reaching response." (Ibid., para. 795)
In the fiftieth anniversary year ahead, the occasion must be seized to provide a new momentum, a new vision, for the United Nations.
The delegation of the Republic of Belarus expresses deep gratitude to the Secretary-General for preparing and submitting to us the report on the work of the Organization for the past year (A/49/l). The report certainly contains an in-depth and comprehensive analysis of the activities of the bodies of the United Nations and Departments of the Secretariat over the past year and, in addition, develops a concept of how to solve the most difficult tasks facing the United Nations at this stage -- that is, how to attain the purposes set forth in the Charter. We note the scientific and philosophic elaboration of the idea of development as a means of ensuring long-term progress for mankind; and we fully support the idea that development is a multidimensional notion with a number of conceptual global categories. It is a process dealing with such areas of human activity as peace; the economy; the environment; and the social sphere, with its most important political component -- democracy. It is vitally important that, at a time when bloodshed and conflict are escalating in so many parts of the world, the Secretary-General's report should point out the causes of such conflicts. Conflicts, primarily the most brutal ones, are ignited in those parts of the world where hunger rages, lawlessness rules and human rights are abused.
Over the past year the international community has witnessed a dynamic transitional period, with phenomena such as a re-evaluation of the present potential for peacemaking, development and cooperation between States. So it is quite natural that the United Nations should not have stood aloof from all of this. Its principal and subsidiary bodies, which are currently being restructured, are adapting to new circumstances and some of them, having achieved their noble goals, are yielding to other bodies confronted with equally difficult tasks. The Trusteeship Council and the Special Committee against Apartheid are good examples. The Commission for Sustainable Development is one of the new bodies.
The Republic of Belarus has already expressed its views on reform in the United Nations. We advocate a more effective, a more dynamic and a more democratic Organization which would act as a centre for coordinating the actions of States on a global, regional and national level. In the present rapidly changing circumstances, this can be achieved only if the Organization can adapt to a new situation quickly. In this connection, we support the Secretary-General's ideas on the principal organs of the Organization, including the Trusteeship Council.
The success of United Nations activities and implementation of its decisions depend to a large extent on what is done by the Secretariat. The Republic of Belarus welcomes the restructuring of the Secretariat being carried out by the Secretary-General which is designed to make it more streamlined and to ensure a stricter system of accountability and hierarchy. We trust that this will lead to a more economic use of the financial resources available.
The report of the Secretary-General now before us states quite correctly that there is no doubt that peace and development are related. The convening of many international conferences on development bears witness to the fact that peace is based on development, humanitarian activities and respect for human rights. These conferences are held at a time when conflicts are escalating, and this is no accident. In trying to root out the underlying causes of conflict, the international community must constantly turn to issues of development, including the sustainable development of small island States, reduction of the dangers of natural disasters, and issues of with population, housing and social development. Our Republic has participated in several international conferences on these issues and has contributed to the elaboration of the recommendations adopted.
Most of these events and conferences have been focused on the interests and needs of developing countries. Belarus accepts these specific circumstances and recognizes the needs of this group of countries, primarily the least developed and the ecologically most vulnerable. We have always supported, and will continue to support, international initiatives for those countries.
We also note that measures have been taken in the interest of countries that have their economies in transition, although these have not been very significant ones. But we cannot agree that the United Nations should pay little attention to the specific circumstances of economies in transition. Like other groups of States, these have their own needs and their own problems in trying to carry out the transition to sustainable development, and their legitimate interests should be taken into account. This is necessary also because of negative developments relating to the interim period of transition from a centralized economy to a market one: the untimely, limited application of measures for the protection and restoration of the environment to certain countries in this period of transition may have negative global implications for sustainable development in various parts of the world. There are serious obstacles to integration into the world and the European economy, most of which are not of an economic nature and constitute the vestiges of cold-war stereotypes. However, the economies in transition, including Belarus, are making active efforts to create open economic systems with a market orientation.
The delegation of Belarus thanks the Secretary-General for focusing attention in his report on relief operations relating to the Chernobyl disaster. The report states quite rightly that Belarus "bore the brunt of the radioactive contamination" and that the "consequences ... still affect large numbers of the population". (A/49/1, para. 343) However, as the Secretary-General also notes, there is a severe shortage of funds for the work of the Inter-Agency Task Force on Chernobyl. In this connection, the delegation of Belarus expresses its sincere thanks to the United Nations Coordinator of International Cooperation on Chernobyl for his measures to mobilize assistance in dealing with the consequences of the disaster. In particular, we thank him for sending letters to the heads of private enterprises throughout the world asking for participation in helping to alleviate the problems resulting from the accident. The Government of the Republic of Belarus hopes that these requests will be duly responded to and that additional resources will be received for the Chernobyl relief operation.
Turning now to chapter IV of the Secretary-General's report, which concerns preventive diplomacy and conflict resolution, my delegation first of all underlines the significance of "An Agenda for Peace" (A/47/277), which offers a conceptual foundation for discussing issues relating to international peace and security following the end of the cold war. The report, in fact, has been a starting-point for many specific reforms within the United Nations system. We therefore welcome the measures taken by the Secretary-General, pursuant to General Assembly resolution 47/120 A and the request of the President of the Security Council. We feel that the effectiveness, streamlining and transparency of peace-keeping operations and activities will be improved through the holding of briefings for Security Council members by representatives of the Secretary-General, through better coordination by the Secretariat in making and implementing decisions on peace-keeping activities through the adoption of measures to create an early-warning mechanism for situations that might threaten international peace and security, and through the elaboration of measures to strengthen the Organization's capacity to prepare for and carry out peace-keeping operations.
We welcome the Secretary-General's conclusion that the resources to implement preventive diplomacy and peace-keeping
"are paltry by comparison with the huge cost in human suffering and material damage which war always brings or with the less huge, but nevertheless substantial, cost of deploying a peace-keeping operation after hostilities have broken out." (A/49/1, para. 411)
On the basis of this conclusion, the Secretary-General has attached priority to preventive diplomacy and peacemaking. This is fully in accord with the observations made by the Belarusian representatives on peace-keeping-operation issues. Over the long term we should try to focus exclusively on preventive diplomacy, establishing peace-keeping operations only in exceptional circumstances.
Belarus currently makes a rather modest contribution to United Nations activities on crisis management and conflict resolution: we have provided specialists for monitoring elections. However, we recognize that there is a shortage in military and other personnel for peace-keeping operations; this point was made by the Secretary-General when he visited Belarus in April of this year, and it is reflected in the report before us. We are taking measures to respond to this concern in concrete and positive terms. The issue of the participation of Belarusian military contingents in peace-keeping operations is currently under consideration by our legislative and executive authorities.
Our brief comments on chapter IV of the report testify to our support for United Nations activities in preventive diplomacy and conflict resolution. Nevertheless, the greater involvement of the United Nations in the resolution of a growing number of conflicts is creating a considerable overload in the financial and human resources of the Organization. Given the long-term financial crisis facing the United Nations, this overload may be a threat to the Organization. The time may come when the United Nations will simply not be able to meet its obligations, which will make it much more difficult to settle any conflicts and will also do serious damage to the Organization's credibility. Furthermore, the increase in the number of United Nations peace-keeping operations invariably leads to a substantial increase in the financial burden on the Members of the Organization, which may become too heavy for some to bear. This relates primarily to those countries whose contribution does not reflect their actual economic capacity. Alas, the Republic of Belarus is one such country.
Thus so we understand the concern of the Secretary-General over the difficult financial situation of the Organization. We understand that owing to the unpredictability and irregularity of contributions made by Member States, it is extremely difficult to manage the Organization efficiently. However, we can hardly agree to such measures as the charging of interest on late payments. This will not really help the United Nations to deal with its financial crisis; rather, it will simply lead to an increase in unpaid contributions of countries, particularly when financial debts to the United Nations are occasioned by the difficult economic situation of the Member concerned. Indebtedness and the resulting financial crisis for the United Nations constitute in themselves a kind of conflict, and as in the case of any other conflict we have to look at the underlying causes if we are going to resolve it. We believe that one of the main problems is the applying of outdated approaches to elaborating the scale of assessments for the regular budget and for peace-keeping operations, which does not reflect the fundamental principle of the ability of States to pay. We believe this is one of the major causes of the financial crisis.
The establishment of a sound legislative basis for the financial activities of the Organization would substantially contribute to the preparations for the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations, and we welcome the report's chapter on the subject.
Finally, I should like once again to express our support for the United Nations in its new phase of activities aimed at achieving the goals of development in all its dimensions and, through this, at the elimination of the roots of conflict, the creation of a new system of international cooperation and the establishment of a solid foundation for a secure, just and creative era for the benefit of all mankind.
On behalf of the Algerian delegation, I should like to extend my warm congratulations to the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for the substantive report he has submitted to the General Assembly. My delegation is pleased to be participating in a discussion on the report, the content of which is not confined to examining the Organization's work over the past year but contains proposals and ideas, sometimes innovative, calling for deeper reflection in the evaluation of their impact on the functioning and effectiveness of our Organization.
The particularly compact nature of the report reflects the vitality of the United Nations and the irreplaceability of its role and vocation as a centre for dialogue and cooperation among States. On the other hand, this makes a deep and painstaking analysis of this document somewhat laborious. Thus, I shall confine myself to making a few comments on those parts of the report which we feel to be crucial to our situation as a developing country resolved more than ever before to making the United Nations the vector of multilateral cooperation for development. In this spirit, Algeria fully endorses the comments and suggestions made this morning by the Permanent Representative of Indonesia, speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement and its member States.
The Secretary-General's report is a valuable tool for evaluating the determination of the international community to give concrete expression to the decisions and recommendations it has laboured to negotiate and adopt. It thus constitutes a test of the credibility of the professions of faith so often proclaimed over the resolve of the Member States to make this Organization, as stipulated in Article 1 (4) of the Charter:
"a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends".
The United Nations is about to celebrate solemnly the fiftieth anniversary of its foundation. This event makes the Secretary-General's report of particular scope and significance this year. It is more than a mere yearly account of the Organization's work. Indeed, one cannot read this document without bearing in mind the original mission of the United Nations, its failures and successes, and its ability to respond to the aspirations of the people of the United Nations who chose to unite their efforts in order to build a more harmonious world of greater solidarity. This careful scrutiny of the United Nations activities and its incomplete achievements should not, however, make us lose sight of the unavoidable truth that the Member States are primarily responsible for its work, or make us forget that the difficulties and shortcomings are due in part to the increasingly frequent recourse made to the Organization, which is now being compelled to take action in many different fields and to confront increasingly complex crises, while at the same time facing an acute financial crisis.
This past year has been particularly heavy for the United Nations. Undeniable successes have been achieved and there have been significant breakthroughs in negotiations and in the discussion of certain questions. The reception of the new South Africa into the General Assembly was a brilliant political victory for our Organization, whose firm position on the principles adopted 20 years ago has thus been rewarded.
The restructuring of the United Nations has now entered a crucial stage. The adoption of resolution 48/264 on the revitalization of the work of the General Assembly, despite its imperfections, has enabled this truly democratic and universal body somewhat to re-establish its powers to coordinate and monitor all the activities of the United Nations.
The discussions on Security Council reform have highlighted the need for equitable representation accompanied by an in-depth reform of its methods of work and decision-making processes. Here, we would reiterate our belief in a reform of the Security Council that would ensure fair representation, transparency and democracy in its functioning, and greater effectiveness arising from a stronger confirmation of its legitimacy.
Increasing recourse to the International Court of Justice for the settlement of disputes is a healthy and positive trend bearing witness to a change of attitude in the subjects of international law concerning the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It also demonstrates the prevalence of a greater awareness of the virtues of building an international order based on law. Cooperation between the Court and the Security Council in connection with the successful settlement of the dispute on the Aouzou Strip illustrates the positive fallout for international peace and security whenever the potential of all United Nations bodies for the peaceful settlement of disputes is actually tapped.
The restructured Economic and Social Council held its first session this year. The substantive session was an enriching experience. However, the deplorable trend towards the marginalization and reduced participation of the developing countries, and Africa in particular, in that organ and its subsidiary bodies is for us grounds for legitimate concern.
Some of the Secretary-General's initiatives in restructuring the Secretariat with a view to enhancing its effectiveness and streamlining resource management are commendable and we support them. It is imperative, however, that those Secretariat departments dealing with economic and social issues take increasing account of the needs of developing countries and pay careful heed to their requests. We should also like to express our support for the Secretary-General's initiatives aimed at decentralizing the activities of the United Nations in the economic and social sectors, which would particularly benefit the regional economic commissions, whose great potential has yet to be fully exploited.
"An Agenda for Development", together with "An Agenda for Peace" should, in principle, offer an integrated institutional and operational framework for United Nations activities. In this connection, I reaffirm our commitment to an integrated approach to peace and development. In this respect, we share the Secretary-General's view on the need for:
"thinking about the pursuit of development as a means of building foundations for enduring human progress". (A/49/1, para. 5)
Like the Secretary-General, we believe that the time has come to stop simply acting upon the consequences or reacting to actual emergencies; rather, we should undertake serious action that would establish the basis for sustainable development. The forthcoming World Summit on Social Development is, in this respect, an excellent opportunity which mankind must seize in order to elaborate an ambitious programme of action that will confront the challenges and significant problems of our times.
We must recognize that the progress made in setting out concepts and policies, and even in drafting institutional and legal instruments, has been somewhat curtailed by the chronic financial crisis resulting from late payments of contributions and a disturbing drop in resources earmarked for development.
The Algerian delegation fully shares in this respect the oft-stated concern of the Secretary-General, a concern that is clearly reflected in this year's report.
The late payment of contributions places our Organization in a precarious situation and greatly reduces its capacity for action. The first repercussions of this crisis can already be seen in the area of the maintenance of international peace and security. The dangerous consequences of reductions in, or withdrawals of, peace-keeping forces for financial reasons are well known: unless a political solution is found, collapse there could once again be appalling tragedies in countries such as Somalia and Rwanda. With more and more devastating and murderous conflicts breaking out, the international community and the Security Council in particular should shoulder their responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, while fully respecting the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of States.
Resources earmarked for operational activities related to development and humanitarian assistance are also dropping to dangerously low levels, thereby jeopardizing the financing of any new projects for the developing countries. This unfortunate trend could imperil whole sectors of multilateral economic cooperation for development. The current system of financing, based on voluntary contributions, has to be reconsidered with a view to guaranteeing the reliability and predictability of the resources and finances that can be mobilized.
On another level, there has been no significant progress this year towards the completion of the decolonization process, which is still one of the priority tasks facing our Organization. Many peoples and territories still under foreign domination are waiting for the United Nations to shoulder its responsibility under the Charter and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. This is the case of the people of Western Sahara, who wish to exercise their right to self-determination through a fair, free and credible referendum carried out by the United Nations in cooperation with the Organization of African Unity. Nothing should keep the United Nations from fulfilling that mission.
In reading the report of the Secretary-General, we are not only further enlightened as to the problems and challenges facing us, but also become more aware of their scope. Fortunately, however, every year we find some grounds for satisfaction that strengthen our belief that the United Nations has a valid mission and a universal message.
We can only hope that next year's report, which will coincide with the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations, will live up even more fully to our expectations and give us even more grounds for hope.
First of all, my delegation wishes to thank the Secretary-General for the report (A/49/1) that he has submitted on the work of the Organization. Uruguay considers that discussion of this report in the General Assembly gives Member States an excellent opportunity to exchange views on the functioning of the Organization, to evaluate results and to lay down guidelines for future action.
A basic idea is set forth in the "Introduction" which, as we see it, underlies the entire development of the document - that is, to correct the mistaken impression that the United Nations is devoting its attention almost exclusively to the maintenance of peace. Through a description of the Organization's activities over the last 12 months, the report attempts to show that the Organization is playing a large role not only in the maintenance of peace but also in the economic and social fields.
My delegation, broadly speaking, shares the approach taken in the report. However, we feel that it would be interesting to go more deeply into some of the ideas that are set forth in the document. Along these lines, the global, integrated approach to the original purposes of the Organization - peace, justice, human rights and development - should be supported by the adoption of concrete measures that will ensure the appropriate fulfilment of those objectives.
Article 1, paragraph 1 of the Charter sets forth peace as the fundamental purpose of the Organization. The desire to strengthen the United Nations and make it more effective in the area of preventive diplomacy, peace-keeping and peace-building was at the origin of the "Agenda for Peace". In that document, fundamental questions were raised, such as those mentioned in paragraph 400 of the present report. Some of the problems mentioned there remain unresolved. We might mention, for example, the implementation of Article 50 of the Charter.
As regards the specific issues that are dealt with in the chapter of the report of the Secretary-General entitled "Preventive diplomacy and peacemaking", we wish to emphasize the establishment and good functioning of the Situation Centre. The work of the staff of this Centre has improved communications between the missions in the field, Headquarters and the troop-contributing countries. Uruguay, as a troop-contributing country, feels that the functions of the Centre are vital to ensure that the contributing countries receive the maximum amount of information. That is why we were surprised at the decision to suspend the distribution of the weekly report on the main events relating to missions in the field. This report was especially useful to the missions and provided a full understanding of events during the period under review.
We also wish to express our satisfaction at the arrangements to establish the nucleus of a Planning Unit. This will help in planning an operation during its initial stages and in coordinating its various elements in an integrated manner. The same could be said of the efforts made to strengthen the staff of the Office of the Military Adviser to the Secretary-General.
As for relations between the Secretariat and the Governments that provide contingents, my delegation regards as very positive the initiatives that were taken to increase the number of meetings between contributing countries and the relevant offices in the area of each mission. Without prejudice to these meetings, within the framework of the Security Council, we should note the proposal contained in document S/1994/1063 to make the participation of troop-contributing countries in consultations more flexible, especially when these relate to substantive issues of their respective mandates.
With the passage of time we see that peace and development are two closely related concepts. It has been said that peace is a key factor in the process of development and that international peace and security, in turn, will be truly guaranteed only if we eliminate the underlying causes of conflicts. Thus economic and social development is seen as one of the bases for the consolidation of international peace and security.
The international community wants to promote economic and social progress among all peoples. This desire was expressed by the General Assembly in its resolution 47/181 of 22 November 1992, which gave rise to the report "An Agenda for Development". Despite the undeniable importance of this subject, we still do not have firm proposals regarding the adoption of policies and measures that indicate a course of concrete and effective action.
The Organization is no longer a protagonist in dealing with macro-economic and financial problems. Its work must be a counterpart to the efforts of the developing countries to regain as far as possible the privileges established by the Charter in the area of economic development. A subsection of the report is devoted to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). My delegation notes the activities in this field that have occurred over the past year. These have enhanced the effectiveness of this Organization and its ability to operate.
When it was set up in 1964 the intention was that UNCTAD would play an important role in the sphere of economic cooperation. Although many of these matters are currently dealt with through the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund or, in the past, by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the fact is that UNCTAD is the only forum with a comprehensive overview of development and with the mandate and the jurisdiction to enable it to tackle a broad range of important items in the context of global interdependence.
This is why, in our judgement, UNCTAD must be revitalized even further; must recover its functions in the areas of coordination, analysis and negotiation of economic policies world wide; and must be strengthened as an instrument of technical assistance for developing countries.
Furthermore, my delegation believes that UNCTAD must act as a catalyst by creating a new international consensus and new types of cooperation between developed and developing countries. We might also point to administrative measures that are indispensable if UNCTAD is to be strengthened -- including measures that relate to the appointment of the body's secretary-general.
In another area, the delegation of Uruguay supports the Secretary-General's initiative for the appointment of an adviser whose purpose would be to improve the coordination of operational activities in the field of development. This would include strengthening the system of resident coordinators. The adviser would introduce consistency in the area of policies and would improve coordination within the United Nations -- especially coordination between the departments at Headquarters, the regional Commissions and the Funds and Programmes of the Organization.
Paragraph 194 of the report refers to the concentration of the work of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in six areas: the alleviation of poverty, management development, technical cooperation between the developing countries, environment and natural resource management, women in development, and technology for development. Uruguay suggests encouraging the designing of means for evaluating the concrete results achieved.
Paragraph 101 of the report deals with a point that gives rise to concern. I refer to the financial crisis that the Organization is going through. The Secretary-General has highlighted the serious cash flow situation in the Organization, especially in respect of peace-keeping missions. Cited once again as the main cause of the situation is that some Member States are still failing to comply with their obligation to pay their assessed contributions fully and on time. My delegation shares the view -- a view that has been expressed already -- that if all Member States paid the amounts they owed, this problem would be resolved.
On this point, my delegation understands that if contributions were assessed on the basis of a State's capacity to pay, the impact of the payment of the quota would be the same on all of the national economies. This subject should be discussed thoroughly with the widest possible participation. The debate on that subject in the Fifth Committee will undoubtedly be very useful.
Finally, my delegation would like to refer to several legal problems that are mentioned in the Secretary-General's report -- the role of the International Court of Justice (ICJ); approval by the General Assembly of an agreement on the implementation of part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, of 10 December 1982; and approval by the International Law Commission of the draft statute for a permanent international criminal court.
Currently there are 186 States parties to the Statute of the ICJ, and 58 States have declared their recognition of the binding jurisdiction of the Court under paragraphs 2 and 5 of Article 36 of the Statute. Uruguay was the first country to sign the optional clause accepting that jurisdiction. In 1921 we acceded to the Permanent Court of International Justice, and under paragraph 5 of Article 36 of the Statute of the ICJ this declaration remains in effect in respect of the International Court of Justice.
In the General Assembly just a few days ago my delegation followed very carefully the introduction by the President of the ICJ, Mr. Mohammed Bedjaoui, of the report on the Court. We share fully the views that the President of the Court expressed when he said that, although a renewed interest in the Court's jurisdiction had been evident in recent years, the fundamental question was not whether that body was extremely busy but, rather, whether it was fully occupying its rightful place in the system for the maintenance of peace, as instituted by the Charter.
Uruguay, as a maritime country, attaches great importance to the entry into force of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. My country was one of the sponsors of resolution 48/263, which contains the agreement on the implementation of Part XI. In this action we were guided by the desire to see respect for the unitary nature of the Convention of 1982 and by the desire to secure universal participation and support for the principles and norms set forth in the Convention.
My delegation is happy with the work that was done by the International Law Commission at its forty-sixth session. In particular, we welcome the conclusion of the draft statute for a permanent international criminal court. Although the tribunal that Uruguay favours would have binding and exclusive jurisdiction, we feel that this has been an important step in the area of the development of international law.
My delegation hopes that, with the advent of the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of this Organization, the guiding force that led in 1918 to the founding of the League of Nations and in 1945 to the creation of the United Nations will now guide the international community as a whole and enable us to respond appropriately to the challenges that we shall face in the coming century.
My delegation would like to express its deep appreciation to the Secretary-General for his report on the work of the Organization, contained in document A/49/1.
The views already expressed by the Chairman of the Non-Aligned Movement, the Ambassador of Indonesia, and the Chairman of the Group of 77, the Ambassador of Algeria, enjoy the full support of the Pakistan delegation. The Secretary-General's comprehensive report truly manifests his outstanding qualities as an academic and the vision he shows in his activities aimed at resolving the many crises confronting the world. The report highlights the numerous achievements of the Organization as well as the challenges of the present which require an urgent and prompt response by this Assembly.
The Secretary-General's earlier report entitled "An Agenda for Development" and the report under consideration both reflect an incisive analysis of the multiple dimensions of development as well as of the unique potential of our Organization to forge a global consensus for multilateral action and an integrated approach encompassing all dimensions of the development challenge. My delegation fully subscribes to the linkages established in the report between peace, economic growth, environmental protection, healthy social conditions, democracy and development. It also agrees that the definition of security in today's world is no longer limited to questions of land and weapons but now includes economic well-being, environmental sustainability and the protection of human rights. As rightly pointed out by the Secretary-General, there is a direct relationship between international peace and security and development.
We agree with the Secretary-General that the World Summit for Social Development and the upcoming fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations present us with historic opportunities. These opportunities should be utilized to enhance global cooperation and create new ways to use the original aims of the Charter - justice, human rights and development - to establish a lasting foundation for international peace and security.
The Pakistan delegation is particularly grateful to Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali for drawing the attention of the world community, in paragraphs 541 and 542 of his report, to the tensions and threat to peace arising from the problems in Jammu and Kashmir. We welcome his willingness to exert all possible efforts to facilitate the search for a lasting solution to one of the oldest unresolved conflicts, a conflict still on the United Nations agenda. Despite assurances and commitments made by the Indian leaders, the right to self-determination has been denied to the oppressed peoples of Jammu and Kashmir since 1947. The world has witnessed an unparalleled reign of terror, which has trampled the human rights of the civilians in that area. Forty-five thousand Kashmiris have been killed and thousands have been tortured or arbitrarily arrested.
The tensions generated by this dispute threaten both regional and international peace and security. My delegation considers it imperative that the international community intercede to promote a just and peaceful solution to the Jammu and Kashmir dispute. ln this context, Pakistan has accepted the Secretary-General's offer of good offices to facilitate the solution of this dispute. We hope India will also accept the Secretary-General's offer.
Ms. Arystanbekova (Kazakhstan), Vice-President, took the Chair.
I wish to take this opportunity to congratulate the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, on the in-depth report he has presented to the General Assembly on the work of the Organization over the last year. We pay tribute to the Secretary-General for the creative and far-sighted leadership he has continued to render to the Organization. Kenya assures him of its cooperation and support in his arduous task.
The Secretary-General has made a very able and thorough review of the operations the Organization has undertaken in the past 12 months, particularly those concerning the implementation of the resolutions of United Nations organs. He has also set out in detail his vision of the future challenges facing the Organization in the main areas of peace and security, sustainable development and social justice.
My delegation concurs with the Secretary-General's view that the success of the United Nations in carrying out its mission will continue to depend principally on the commitment of its Member States and of the general public to the Organization. With the end of the cold war, there is renewed support for the Organization and therefore the need to seize the opportunity to reinforce its moral authority in the pursuit of its noble objectives as inscribed in the Charter.
The United Nations, like any other Organization, cannot function effectively without a sound financial base. All of us, as Members of the Organization, have a responsibility to ensure that the assessed contributions are paid on time and that the budget of the Organization is consonant with the demands and the responsibilities that the general membership puts on it.
Kenya is appreciative of the stress that the Secretary-General is placing on the need to balance appropriations for peace and security and those allocated to social and economic development. It is of great interest to us that the Secretary-General has expressed particular concern regarding the need to strengthen the links between emergency assistance, rehabilitation and long-term development. We commend him for appointing the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme, Mr. James Speth, to assist in shouldering the overall responsibility of improving the coordination of operational activities for development. In that regard, the strategy to strengthen United Nations activities at the regional and national levels is most welcome.
As the United Nations reassesses itself for the forthcoming fiftieth anniversary of the Organization and maps out its strategy for the future, Kenya subscribes to the view that a bottom-up approach in regard to international peace and security, sustainable development and social justice is the most effective way forward. Capacity-building at the national and regional levels as it relates to governmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as general mobilization of the population in support of United Nations activities and the Organization's response to local, national and regional concerns, cannot be overemphasized.
May I now comment on a few specific aspects of the Secretary-General's report. We welcome the progress made so far regarding reform of the Organization with a view to improving the efficiency and administrative functioning of the Organization. Chapter II of the Secretary-General's report entitled "Coordinating a comprehensive strategy" highlights, inter alia, the increased responsibility of the Security Council in the light of the numerous challenges to international peace and security that it is called upon to address. With the demise of the cold war, the international community has now reposed greater confidence in the role of the Organization. In this regard reform of the Security Council has acquired crucial importance and urgency.
My delegation welcomes the decision already made by the Assembly to extend the mandate of the Open-ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation on and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council. My delegation looks forward to the conclusion of the work of the Working Group during this session. The extensive debate which has already taken place over the item has substantially highlighted the urgent need for the reform of the Council, not only to enhance its efficiency, transparency and working methods, but also to reflect a more realistic and equitable representation of the general membership of the Organization.
Of crucial importance is the need for the Council to reflect equitable geographical representation. My delegation has already expressed its views under agenda item 33 of the Assembly and looks forward to participate further in the work of the Group.
We welcome the arrangements that the Secretary-General has already put in place with a view to servicing the Council, including the appointment of a Special Adviser, at Under-Secretary-General level, to serve as his personal representative to the Council.
In chapter III of the report, the Secretary-General describes development, humanitarian action and human rights as the foundations of peace. Building on "An Agenda for Development" submitted by the Secretary-General to the General Assembly in June 1994, the Assembly has devoted several meetings to an in-depth discussion of the Agenda. Lively discussion of the Agenda also took place at the World Hearings on Development, convened by the President of the General Assembly last June, as well as at the Economic and Social Council session, also held in June 1994.
In this regard we welcome the proposal by the Secretary-General to strengthen the links between emergency assistance, rehabilitation and long-term development. The Secretary-General's decision to entrust the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) with overall responsibility for assisting him in improving coordination activities for development is particularly welcomed by our delegation. It is our strong conviction that the United Nations has an important role to play in matters of development. Whereas the donor community and the Bretton Woods institutions have an important role to play in this regard, the experiences of many developing countries, including my own, is that these organizations tend to impose -- although not intended -- policies that tend to have very adverse effects on vulnerable members of society. The structural adjustment programmes, though usually necessary, need to be accompanied by safety nets that can cushion the vulnerable groups from the adverse effects that usually accompany such programmes.
In this regard, we look forward to the major forthcoming world conferences where some of these issues will be discussed in detail. In particular, the World Summit for Social Development to be held in Copenhagen next year is expected to articulate a programme of action for the international community in this vital field. That Conference must contend with the reality that the social situation of people cannot be improved without, in general, improved economic conditions.
My delegation has noted with great concern, the observation in paragraph 188 of the report that there has been a considerable downturn in resources for operational activities of the Organization. In particular, the resource allocations to some of the organizations whose mandates are of critical importance to developing countries such as UNDP, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) have been going down. The Secretary-General's report clearly demonstrates the necessity to strengthen the capacity of these organizations to enable them to cope with their increased responsibilities, especially as envisaged in chapter 38 of Agenda 21. Paragraph 181 of the report specifically points out that despite the clear call by Agenda 21 for UNEP to be given greater expertise and additional resources, resource constraints are continuing to affect its activities in a number of programme areas such as energy, environmental health, atmosphere and environmental assessment.
We also note the observation that resources remain the most important challenge facing Habitat in preparing for the Habitat II Conference. UNDP has experienced a 15 per cent reduction in core resources, while UNICEF faced a serious reversal in contributions in 1993, bringing the level down by $150 million from the peak in 1992 of $688 million. UNFPA experienced a drop in contributions of $18.4 million in 1993 from $238 million in 1992.
This situation should not be allowed to continue. There is clear evidence that the Organization's resources continue to be directed towards peace-keeping and humanitarian budgets at the expense of development. We wish to reiterate what the Secretary-General has himself pointed out that development must be given priority as it is the foundation of peace.
With specific regard to UNEP, it is pointed out in the Secretary-General's report that UNEP provides the secretariats for the following five international conventions: the Convention on Biological Diversity; the Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal; the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer; the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna; and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals.
Furthermore, the programme continues to coordinate and support 13 regional sea programmes, nine of which are based upon regional conventions.
Thus UNEP has built considerable expertise in servicing the environmental conventions. The Rio de Janeiro Conference on Environment and Development also underscored the role of UNEP as the lead agency in the United Nations system on environmental issues. For these reasons, we are convinced that the permanent secretariats of the new environmental conventions should also be located with UNEP in Nairobi; these include biological diversity, climate change and desertification. This would indeed be consistent with the wish of the General Assembly and the decisions of the Governing Council of UNEP which have consistently called for the strengthening, harmonization, cost-effectiveness and enhancement of the efficiency of UNEP and indeed of other United Nations programmes.
With regard to section D of chapter III entitled "The humanitarian imperative", the Secretary-General has elaborated on the measures that he has put in place to strengthen coordination among the various actors in the humanitarian, political and peace-keeping activities of the United Nations.
We wish to emphasize that the United Nations needs to strengthen its capacity to respond to situations requiring preventive diplomacy so as to avoid catastrophes of the type we recently witnessed in Rwanda.
We wish to express our appreciation to the Secretary-General for his comprehensive and forward-looking report on the work of the organization (A/49/1).
The report demonstrates clearly the challenges and opportunities which now face the United Nations in an increasingly complex global environment. It also outlines the significant action which has been taken in many areas during the past year to strengthen the role and functioning of the Organization to respond effectively to those challenges and opportunities.
The Secretary-General emphasizes that the new international context and the multidimensional nature of the challenges call for multilateral action and an integrated approach, and we agree. Our shared objective must be one of cooperating for peace through strengthening cooperative security in all of its manifestations.
As the Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Gareth Evans, stated three weeks ago during the general debate:
"The distinction between peace and security on the one hand and development on the other has too often been a matter for sterile and unhelpful debate, with attempts to trade off one for the other as key goals for the United Nations. Any viable modern concept of international peace, let alone peace within States, must recognize that the two are indissolubly bound up with each other: there can be no sustainable peace without development, and no development without peace." (Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-ninth Session, Plenary Meetings, 15th meeting, p. 8)
For these reasons, Australia welcomes the Secretary-General's efforts in producing an Agenda for Development, following on, as it does, from "An Agenda for Peace". Among other important considerations, it recognizes the relationship between peace and development, acknowledging that equitable development eradicates many of the socio-political conditions in which threats to peace breed. And -- this is very important -- it places emphasis on individual human beings as the subjects and beneficiaries of our development efforts. It recognizes that economies should serve people.
We also applaud the focus the Secretary-General has placed on practical international cooperation for global human security, for example in the areas of emergency humanitarian assistance, effective governance and the key social issues which form the agenda of the World Summit on Social Development.
A more integrated effort will clearly be required -- required of the United Nations system -- if the objectives set out in the Agenda for Development are to be achieved. It is imperative that we improve the system's ability to develop and implement social and economic development programmes in a more coordinated and coherent manner, including finding ways to allow the Bretton Woods institutions and United Nations bodies to work in closer harmony. But more than this will be required, including changes in the senior decision-making structure of the United Nations Secretariat. Considerable reform in the intergovernmental elements of the United Nations system has been achieved and is being worked out, but the same is not true of the Secretariat itself. Notwithstanding some welcome recent changes -- including, in particular, the appointment of the Special Adviser to the Secretary-General for Operational Activities -- Australia believes that there continues to be a strong case for creating a new working collegiate executive of four Deputy Secretaries-General to work with the Secretary-General responsible, respectively, for economic and social affairs, peace and security affairs, humanitarian affairs and administration and management.
One of the most crucial elements in any functioning system of cooperative security is an effective capacity for preventive diplomacy. We are therefore pleased to note that the Secretary-General's report contains an extensive chapter on expanding the role of the United Nations in preventive diplomacy and conflict resolution, in which, as the report records, considerable progress has been made in a number of areas since the publication of "An Agenda for Peace".
Australia is convinced that the United Nations can and should do more in this respect to prevent disputes from escalating into armed conflicts. This can be done in today's world; it must be done and there is abundant evidence that prevention is not only preferable but also less costly than cure. To give further impetus to this process we propose to introduce at the current session a draft resolution on enhancing preventive diplomacy. We believe that there is widespread support for the United Nations to build strong preventive diplomacy machinery -- to develop the capacity, foreseen by its founders and articulated in Article 33 of the Charter, to operate as an active agent in the peaceful settlement of disputes.
The Organization would be able to operate more effectively in this area by giving its staff additional skills in dispute resolution and in conflict management. We commend its efforts to do so through the fellowship course of the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), and Australia will continue to provide backing for this training. We propose that the United Nations develop a dispute-resolution service within its Secretariat. We advocate strengthening the Department of Political Affairs and increasing coordination, information sharing and early warning capacity amongst and between the various elements of the United Nations system. Greater use should also be made of the resources of Member States and stronger linkages forged with regional security arrangements.
Such regional organizations and arrangements can themselves play a very useful role, but we must have realistic expectations of them because most cannot match the capacity of global bodies to marshal resources for peace-building or, at the other end of the scale, for military responses to crises. They nevertheless offer a way of bringing together the parties to disputes in a constructive and non-confrontational framework.
We welcome recent developments to strengthen regional approaches, in particular the recent inaugural meeting of the regional forum of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), with its evident willingness to develop preventive diplomacy in the Asia-Pacific region. We hope others will share our interest in exploring the scope for establishing regional peace and security resource centres to advance these objectives under the banner of regional organizations or the United Nations itself, or both.
The role which preventive diplomacy can play in contributing to cooperative security is vital. Earlier this week, for example, the General Assembly adopted a resolution which addressed the situation in the Central African Republic of Burundi, a country which is proving to be a test case for international efforts at preventive diplomacy. It was not until the tragic events in Rwanda earlier this year that the international community's attention was drawn properly to the situation in Burundi. Given the historical links between the two countries and their similar internal tensions, it was only natural that Burundi was seen as vulnerable to the same tragic events that had gripped Rwanda. Although the situation in Burundi remains fragile, peace does prevail there, and this is partly owing to the preventive steps taken by the international community, which have helped allow Burundi to avoid following in Rwanda's path.
Through consultations between the political parties, carried out in a spirit of reconciliation, a new President has been invested in Burundi and a new Government has been formed. The efforts of the international community at preventive action in Burundi have been encouraging, but they need to be sustained. As the Secretary-General noted in a recent report on Burundi,
"Compared with the exorbitant amounts that would have been needed for emergency assistance if the Rwandese tragedy were repeated in Burundi, the price to be paid for prevention today seems minimal". (S/1994/1152, para. 47)
The Secretary-General observes in his report that the fiftieth anniversary year, which I might mention began at midnight four days ago,
"represents an exhilarating challenge and an invaluable opportunity to forge a global consensus behind development, in all of its dimensions, as the most lasting foundation for international peace and security and as the greatest hope for all humanity". (para. 12)
We Australians fully endorse this view. We also believe that an integral part of the new approach the United Nations must take to meet this challenge is to give greater emphasis to the role that preventive diplomacy, in all of its manifestations, can play. We can do more to strengthen the contribution that preventive diplomacy can make to international peace and security, and we can do this at this session of the General Assembly. It is an opportunity that we should seize.
The discussion under item 10 of the agenda is probably one of the most important of this session. Its importance lies precisely in the fact that, as we approach the commemoration of the first half-century of this Organization, the debate grows stronger on what the Organization should be in the future, what its powers and aims should be and how it should act to face the enormous challenges confronting mankind during the final years of the millennium.
My delegation has examined the Secretary-General's report with great care, and we agree in essence with the statement made by the Chairman of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, which contains many of the doubts and concerns that Cuba shares.
It is impossible to include in a single statement the wide-ranging ideas contained in the Secretary-General's report. Therefore we will confine ourselves to a number of necessary reflections and to commenting on concepts that we consider erroneous, while the Cuban delegation will continue to comment on the elements contained in this report both in plenary meetings and in the Main Committees of this forty-ninth session.
It is gratifying to find in the Introduction of this document a number of ideas that in our opinion should make up the essence of the work of the United Nations at this stage of its history. We consider that the emphasis upon the issue of development is crucial, and in this context we find it appropriate that the Secretary-General is determined
"to correct the common misperception of the United Nations as an Organization dedicated primarily to peace-keeping". (para. 1)
But this Organization itself is probably to blame for that misperception. In the euphoria of these few last years it may have forgotten the multidisciplinary nature of its role and may have concentrated excessively on peace-keeping and related activities. We have observed with concern on many occasions how most of the resources at the disposal of the international community for multilateral activities have been devoted to peace-keeping while ignoring other fields, such as economic and social development, which should constitute areas of priority attention.
It likewise does not seem appropriate that, as stated in the report, the international community is obligated to redefine the concept of development. This Organization is not new, nor are the economic and social problems that affect a large part of mankind. For decades this Organization has adopted hundreds of documents that clearly define, in one way or another, what development is and what role this Organization should play in the efforts to extend the benefits of progress to all and to create just and equitable international economic relations in the world.
We do not have to prepare new definitions of development, nor do we have to adopt new agendas that ignore the achievements of decades and, moveover, contain concepts that are frequently not acceptable to all States, in particular those that would most benefit from development. We must be capable of creating conditions for the emergence of a true political willingness to promote development on a world-wide scale and to recognize as the main role of the United Nations the management of international cooperation to that end, as the report itself states.
Thus, even if we agree that various elements in today's world are closely related, we must not ignore the fact that development occupies the highest place. There can be no peace without development, as the Secretary-General himself has recognized on more than one occasion; without development there can be no guarantee of stopping the deterioration of the environment; without development true social justice cannot be promoted; and there can be no true democracy, either within or between States, without an accelerated advance towards economic and social development.
We are surprised that the philosophical foundations of the report do not give due attention to the principles enshrined in the Charter -- which is the cornerstone of the work of this Organization -- or to the manner in which they will be applied in the future. We find it also surprising that the report does not refer in a precise manner to the main objective of the United Nations: to promote international cooperation in a wide range of fields. We think that these issues cannot be disregarded and that the Member States should rectify this regrettable omission, especially in periods that are tending to clear the ground for such equivocal concepts as that of "limited sovereignty", when interference in the internal affairs of States is increasingly practised and when attempts are frequently made to replace cooperation with coercion.
The Chairman of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries clearly recalled the positions of the Movement regarding some of the most important issues concerning the ongoing restructuring of this Organization. Nevertheless, I would like to place on record that the description of the various principal organs contained in the Secretary-General's report is also illustrative in this regard. For example, figure 4, which appears on page 5 of the report, contrasts the increase in informal consultations of the whole of the Security Council with the increase in the Council's formal meetings. This clearly shows why the work of the Security Council requires a greater transparency.
Similarly, reference is made throughout the report to the restructuring of the Secretariat, and we believe that the legislative mandates of the organs of the United Nations have not been adequately respected in all cases. We must not forget, in this context, that the priorities of this Organization can only be determined by its Member States. We hope that this rule will not continue to be ignored in the future.
By the same token, the Secretariat is also autonomously carrying out other activities which, in practice, tend to create conditions for the introduction of changes that the majority of Member States do not want. For example, in paragraph 383 of the report, there is a reference to discussions between the Centre for Human Rights and the Department of Peace-keeping Operations on ways and means of securing the further support of the Centre in peace-keeping operations. We should be wary of the precedent that activities of this nature can create.
We must also be careful about current concepts linked to this trend. Among them is so-called "humanitarian preventive action", which, though it may appear commendable, contains a great potential for interventionism that must be avoided.
We are also concerned by the imbalance in the report between the various activities to be carried out by the Organization. Only a small portion of the report is truly devoted to development and yet, despite this, elements regarding humanitarian assistance and human rights are added to it. On the other hand, and in contrast, practically the entire text is permeated one way or another with the concept of preventive diplomacy. It would seem as if, rather than a report on the work of the United Nations for the year, we were examining a second edition of the document "An Agenda for Peace".
In the statement I had the honour to make last year on this item, I referred to our concern regarding the subordination of third world development to the implementation of new concepts allegedly addressing the maintenance of international peace and security. We also expressed our concern about the change in priorities represented by the loss of the necessary balance between peace-keeping and the obligations of the United Nations in the field of international cooperation for development.
The approach prevailing in this year's report has also inverted the priorities of the Organization, a phenomenon which seems to be on its way to becoming a rule. Does the Secretariat not consider it worth while to promote the renewal of a serious and meaningful North-South dialogue? Does the Secretariat, which feels empowered to devote priority attention to preventive diplomacy and peacemaking, not feel equally empowered to offer its good offices for the establishment of a more just and equitable international economic order? Is not the achievement of development the best means for the effective prevention of conflicts?
We agree with the aim of trying to avoid human tragedies brought about by armed conflict, but underdevelopment, poverty, malnutrition and lack of access to adequate health care are more costly today in terms of human lives than all the wars being waged on our planet. Is the proportion of three-to-one between the resources being devoted to peace-keeping and related activities and those devoted to development appropriate? Obviously, priorities are being inverted and even the most cursory glance through the report shows this to be so.
This equation inevitably prompts us to address an issue that has been receiving much attention lately. We are referring to the Organization's so-called "financial crisis". We have our doubts that this is the appropriate term for this situation. It would seem that what we actually have is a "cash-flow crisis". It has not been demonstrated that the financial structures of the Organization and their operating mechanisms, such as the different scales of assessments, are in crisis. If we compare the figures of the Organization's debts, provided by the Secretariat itself, against the figure of monies owed to the Organization, the assertion I made earlier would seem to be confirmed. Thus we see no need to carry out the radical changes proposed to satisfy a few big Powers nor to go against the established procedures for the discussion of budgetary issues by setting aside the Fifth Committee of this General Assembly.
On the other hand, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the large expenses incurred in the past few years have come through peace-keeping operations. We should first determine whether those expenses have really been justified, whether they have responded to the interests of the Organization as a whole, and whether they are in line with the priorities accepted by the majority of Member States. Then, and only then, should we review the financial procedures of this Organization.
Lastly, I should like to refer to issues related to peace-keeping. It continues to amaze us that nowhere in the report is there mentioned the principles that should govern these operations and their related activities -- essentially, the consent of the parties involved in a conflict, as a necessary precondition to the establishment of a peace-keeping operation. We are concerned by the growing practice of having the Security Council "license" certain States or groups of States to resolve specific situations, which also seems to be legitimized by the report, as is the tendency to encourage the United Nations through peace-keeping operations or other related activities to interfere in issues that fall exclusively within the internal jurisdiction of States. Further comment on the unpredictable consequences of these actions is unnecessary.
We have made a few comments on the Secretary-General's report for this year and, above all, on its underlying philosophy. We continue to disagree with the Secretary-General on a number of issues and concepts, but we agree with him on many others. As always, we are ready to show flexibility and to try to find, through dialogue and negotiation among Member States, common views that will allow the United Nations to meet the second half of its first century of existence with a truly human face and with priorities that truly respond to the interests of mankind as a whole, and not just a part of it.
Our deliberations at this session of the General Assembly are being held at an important time in the life of the United Nations, since we are on the eve of the fiftieth anniversary of the Organization. It is therefore our duty to cast a glance backwards at past successes and problems and to take stock of them. In doing so, it is all the more necessary to keep our minds focused on the future and on the need to adapt the Organization to present-day challenges and those yet to come.
The past year has marked further progress in the process of restructuring the social and economic sector of the Organization and in efforts to strengthen its role and effectiveness in the area of international cooperation for development. The evolving perception that peace, economic growth, the environment, social justice and democracy are interlocking and mutually reinforcing has been widely recognized. The need for a comprehensive innovative approach to development has gained wide support. In this context, particular importance should be attached to the further discussions on the report of the Secretary-General on "An Agenda for Development". We share the view that "An Agenda for Development" should be aimed at making the United Nations more responsive to new development realities. Identifying ways and means of harmonizing and coordinating the interrelationships between peace and development and the manner they are dealt with deserves adequate attention.
Efforts to restructure and revitalize the activities of the United Nations, bearing in mind the requirements mentioned earlier, should be continued. Since its creation the United Nations has evolved as a unique international body in which all pressing issues, across the political, economic and social spectrum can be approached in an integrated manner. It has increased responsibilities and plays a greater role today; the cold war and bipolar confrontation have come to an end, but the international community faces new challenges and threats.
We are confident that the restructuring of the United Nations economic and social sectors will ensure a better balance in the activities of the Organization and will make it more responsive to and more effective in dealing with the interrelated problems of development. In this context, it is our strong belief that the United Nations will continue to give due attention to the problems of the countries in transition. The reinforcement of the United Nations system for operational activities and a more active cooperation between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions are important elements in this process.
Along with increased attention to and concern for the socio-economic dimension of security, the trend towards expanding the involvement of the United Nations in preventive diplomacy and crisis management that we have witnessed in recent years should be further upheld and promoted. Bulgaria has traditionally acknowledged and supported making better use of the instruments for the prevention of conflicts and crises, and we welcome the substantive progress made in that area.
Another major component of the Organization's conflict- resolution efforts is the growing involvement of the United Nations in peace-keeping throughout the world. We welcome the efforts to enhance its peace-keeping capacity in a changing world. As peace-keeping operations become more complex, dangerous and expensive, special attention should be given to such pressing issues as enhancing the Organization's institutional framework in the area of peace-keeping, the search for ways and means to solve the financial problems related to peace-keeping operations, and the imperative need to ensure a greater level of safety and security for peace-keeping personnel.
Significant progress has been made in these areas. We support the development of the system of "stand-by arrangements", and have already committed national resources for use in United Nations peace-keeping operations. We are actively contributing to the work on an international convention dealing with safety and security of United Nations and associated personnel. We share the growing concern over existing problems in the financial aspects of peace-keeping. Therefore, we join those who call for redoubling the efforts to seek answers to those questions.
On the topic of the comprehensive array of preventive and enforcement measures to solve conflicts, let me recall that Bulgaria attaches extreme importance to the issues related to devising an overall mechanism for the implementation of Article 50 of the Charter of the United Nations. We are in favour of devising such a mechanism, which would guarantee the equitable sharing of the economic burden by the whole international community.
The cooperation of the United Nations with regional organizations is an essential element of the evolving new international system of security and stability. Bulgaria was among the initiators of the process of cooperation and coordination between the United Nations and the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), and consistently supports its promotion. It is also our desire to see a closer link between the United Nations and the Council of Europe. We think that stronger interaction between the two organizations is possible, especially in the area of human rights issues and in the efforts towards conflict prevention, post-conflict peace-building and the consolidation of democratic institutions. A good starting point in this regard is the existing framework of tripartite meetings between the Council of Europe, the CSCE and the United Nations.
In conclusion, I should like to underscore the significance my country attaches to the overall process of reforming and adapting the Organization to the new challenges of our time, and to reaffirm our dedication and commitment to this process.
Nicaragua, as a member of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and the Group of 77, fully supports the statements made by the Permanent Representatives of Indonesia and Algeria on this subject. Nevertheless, we would like to state Nicaragua's position on such an important document as the report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization, for which we would like to express our special gratitude.
In 1995 the United Nations will turn 50. Our Organization, created in San Francisco to save humankind "from the scourge of war", will then have the opportunity to undertake a thorough study of the achievements and errors made during that historic period, so full of hope, which saw the rebirth of the great ideal of democracy.
The 1980s in particular bore clear witness to a monumental change of a historical, political and social nature. Our United Nations has today become a beacon signalling a safe haven from upheavals caused by conflicts of all kinds. The hopes of all humankind are today placed in our Organization.
In his recently published report on the work of the Organization the Secretary-General states:
"During the period covered by this, my third annual report, I have sought to correct the common misperception of the United Nations as an organization dedicated primarily to peace-keeping. Economic and social questions have long occupied the major part of United Nations efforts. Such work has become all the more important today precisely as conflicts are increasingly recognized to have economic and social origins." (A/49/1, para. 1).
In this context, we consider that our Organization must devote itself with renewed vigour to the struggle against inequity and injustice. The United Nations must not only be the bearer of hope, but must fulfil its commitments in the economic and social areas, working hard to achieve at least a minimal improvement in the living conditions of humankind. The Organization must meet this historic challenge, updating its methods, making better use of the experience it has accumulated and trying to optimize the availability of resources, which are inadequate to carry out at the same time three essential tasks: the maintenance of international peace and security, economic and social development and the protection of the environment for future generations.
It is a matter of concern that even as the United Nations has increased its responsibilities, especially as regards peace-keeping operations, it is left defenceless in a deep and almost permanent financial crisis. The international community must give financing top priority, but it must be complemented by rational management of existing resources, and the General Assembly must be able to assess the effectiveness of the measures taken by the Secretary-General in establishing a more direct structure of responsibility of States. We also welcome the creation of the Office of Internal Oversight Services, headed by an Under-Secretary-General.
The multidimensional character of the United Nations is reflected in the increasing responsibilities of its organs and specialized agencies. The General Assembly is playing a more valuable role in international relations, so it is important that the role of its President be strengthened. One of the most important tasks facing us this session is the restructuring of the United Nations. Hence, the approach to reform and restructuring must be comprehensive and balanced. We must promote a more balanced relationship between the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Secretary-General, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter.
General Assembly sessions have seen an increase in the number of agenda items. We welcome the growing tendency to adopt draft resolutions by consensus and the increasing participation of Heads of State and Government in the General Assembly's general debates. We must also highlight the importance of the General Assembly's establishment of an open-ended working group to deal with the question of equitable representation on and an increase in the membership of the Security Council.
We are particularly happy to see that all matters relating to human rights are appropriately reflected in the Secretary-General's report. The report contains pertinent references to the various activities of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, who is now charged with the promotion and protection of all civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights. Our delegation is pleased with the manner in which Ambassador José Ayala Lasso is carrying out his mandate.
As the Secretary-General says, the High Commissioner has principal responsibility for human rights activities within the United Nations. My delegation considers it appropriate that, as part of the process of restructuring to increase the effectiveness of our efforts in the field of human rights, we should try to coordinate the tasks of all the competent bodies and allocate the necessary financial resources for this important work.
The steady increase in the work of the Security Council has aroused great interest among States Members of the Organization. We agree with the point made by many delegations that there must be greater transparency in the Security Council's methods of work. There is almost universal interest and support for considering the question of increasing the membership of the Council with a view to bringing its work into line with current international realities.
We are therefore satisfied with the Council's decision to set up a working group to study the question of how its methods of work could be improved with a view to achieving, among other things, greater transparency. In this context, we should like to refer to the report (A/49/2) presented by the Council to the General Assembly. In spite of its very large size, this does not seem to be a document of substance. The report should be analytical rather than descriptive. It should deal with all the questions discussed by the Security Council and should contain a detailed evaluation of the work of the Council's special committees.
In 1992 the General Assembly welcomed the Secretary-General's report entitled "An Agenda for Peace", and in September 1993 the Assembly adopted a second resolution on this subject. The Security Council has held a number of meetings to deal with specific proposals on "An Agenda for Peace". The Agenda has led to many concrete reforms in the United Nations system through the adoption of tangible measures. We applaud the adoption of these measures recommended by the Secretary-General.
We endorse, albeit with some concern, what has been achieved through preventive diplomacy and initiatives in the field of peace-keeping operations as well as instruments for the maintenance of international peace and security. These operations, so long as they are carried out appropriately, can be very beneficial. The sums required are minimal by comparison with the inevitable enormous cost, in terms of human suffering and material damage, of war and continued conflict. We congratulate the Secretary-General on giving priority to preventive diplomacy, and we hope that this will be further strengthened as an effective instrument of collective security.
We are very interested in the report entitled "An Agenda for Development" which the Secretary-General presented to the General Assembly on 4 May 1994. This report has given rise to a stimulating and lively debate. During the Economic and Social Council's discussions on the subject, Governments indicated their desire to enhance the effectiveness of the development activities of the United Nations and to strengthen practical cooperation in these activities. We believe that greater consistency must be achieved in the criteria governing development activities. This task cannot be postponed. All Member States must categorically promote the adoption of an action-oriented agenda that defines strategies, parameters and the means of achieving reform of the current international economic system and of fulfilling many of the aspirations of the developing world.
We are particularly concerned over the fact that the question of foreign debt -- a principal source of instability in the developing world -- is not reflected adequately in the Secretary-General's report. Nicaragua, as a country with a high indebtedness, attributes great importance to this subject. We believe that the United Nations should play a greater role in the search for viable solutions to the whole problem. An agenda for development, to be feasible, must take into account the impact of external debt on the economies of the developing countries, especially the least developed of them.
As regards the restructuring of the United Nations development system, we are confident that the appointment of an Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme to help the Secretary-General improve the coordination of operational activities for development -- activities such as strengthening the role of the resident coordinator and improving the consistency of policies in the United Nations system -- will yield good results.
I should like now to refer to a matter of major importance to my delegation. My country, Nicaragua, is a new democracy. The country and its people have recent experience of a terrible internal conflict that devastated the land for more than a decade. This experience has taught us to believe in coexistence and in the merits of democracy.
In this context, we are particularly concerned that the Secretary-General's report -- specifically the part dealing with the "Agenda for Peace" -- does not adequately address all the initiatives the United Nations system has taken and all the support it has given to many countries of the international community with a view to consolidating peace and strengthening democracy and its institutions.
The strengthening of democracy is a vital component of preventive diplomacy and of economic and social development. The United Nations must feel proud of the success of its efforts to consolidate democracy in various parts of the world -- among them, my country.
We consider that the Organization's work in support of democracy and peace must be strengthened and that it merits close attention. Here we should like to refer to the support of the United Nations for the holding of the Second International Conference of New or Restored Democracies, which took place in Managua, Nicaragua, last July and was attended by 77 countries as participants or observers. This would not have been possible without the support of the United Nations system. In the Plan of Action that the Conference adopted it was agreed that the Secretary-General should be asked to prepare a study on how the United Nations system could promote the consolidation of new or restored democracies. In the coming days we shall be submitting a draft resolution on this subject.
In conclusion, we should like to commend the Secretary-General for his broad vision -- the product of his great experience as a diplomat and statesman. We agree with the comment in his report that this difficult period for mankind provides us with a great opportunity to bring together, in a coherent and unified fashion, the original aims of the world Organization. This comprehensive vision would enable the United Nations to enhance its operational effectiveness in dealing with the multidimensional questions related to an integrated approach and renewed multilateral action.
As it completes 50 years, the United Nations must recognize that, in large part, the attitudes and experiences of the past are no longer relevant. The new political situation and the economic challenges that we face on the threshold of the twenty-first century require major decisions on the part of the international community as a whole. The time has come to cast off the shackles of the past and to face together the challenges of world-wide and economic social reconstruction.
Mr. Mwaungulu (Malawi), Vice-President, took the Chair.
The delegation of the Republic of Korea welcomes the report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization. At the outset, I would like to express my deep appreciation to the Secretary-General and his staff for producing an important and useful document. Today, the United Nations is deeply involved in a wide range of issues which have a far-reaching impact on our lives and the environment. It is for this reason that my delegation values the comprehensive yet concise overview of the whole range of activities of the world body over the past 12 months.
Rather than trying to touch upon the multiplicity of issues, activities and actors covered in the report, I will make general observations on such key areas as development, humanitarian assistance, peace-keeping operations and the financial situation of the Organization.
Despite the considerable achievements in development during the last 50 years, developing countries are continuously confronted with daunting challenges, such as poverty, disease, unemployment inadequate education and environmental degradation.
If the international community is to surmount these challenges, it must continue to focus on development as a top priority of the global agenda. As development is one of the most effective means of preventive diplomacy, development and peace naturally go hand in hand.
My delegation is pleased to see that the United Nations has progressively attached more importance to the issue of development. The Secretary-General's report entitled "An Agenda for Development" is a most timely and important document. We feel that in order to serve as a strong complement to "An Agenda for Peace" the report could be enhanced with further feasible and action-oriented recommendations.
Although individual countries must bear the primary responsibility for development, national efforts must be buttressed by international cooperation. The United Nations is the most appropriate and capable forum to deal with this vital issue, particularly in formulating a comprehensive approach for development through its capacity to accumulate experience, expertise and human resources in this field. At the same time, the reform and restructuring of the United Nations should be continued and further strengthened to meet new and complex responsibilities. In this regard, coordination among development-related agencies is essential. My delegation welcomes the Secretary-General's decision to assign new responsibility to the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme to assist him in enhancing policy coherence with the United Nations and overall coordination of operational activities for development. Given the broad-based and comprehensive concept of development, the United Nations must reinforce its role in this area by adopting a new approach which will effectively respond to the challenging needs of developing countries.
During the past 12 months, the international community has witnessed a number of massive humanitarian crises world wide. Particularly shocking is the genocide committed in flagrant violation of the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter. Faced with unprecedented humanitarian disasters caused by armed ethnic and civil conflicts and natural disasters, the relevant organs of the United Nations, particularly the Department of Humanitarian Assistance, have played an instrumental role in arranging and coordinating humanitarian assistance to victims. However, the report alerts us to the disturbing fact that over 30 million people in 29 countries are still plagued by humanitarian emergencies. Given the magnitude of the situation, strengthened coordination among the various actors in the humanitarian field, as well as among the humanitarian, political and peace-keeping activities of the United Nations, should be strongly encouraged. My delegation urges the international community to reinforce its assistance to the affected populations, while the United Nations, through the Department of Humanitarian Affairs and the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), continues to endeavour to enhance its ability to respond quickly and in a coherent manner.
With humanitarian relief operations frequently being carried out in the midst of violent conflict, another major challenge lies in securing adequate protection for humanitarian personnel. In this regard, principles and operational guidelines for relief programmes in conditions of conflict, which are being worked out under the auspices of the IASC, should be elaborated as quickly as possible.
Peace-keeping operations are also being conducted in more challenging settings. As operations have increased not only in peril but also in cost, it has become difficult to find sufficient troops and support personnel to cope with the most arduous tasks, while emergency conflict situations demand rapid deployment of military and civilian personnel. Moreover, the persistent United Nations financial crisis, due to the failure of Member States to pay their assessments on time, has delayed troop-contributor reimbursement.
In light of the difficult conditions surrounding peace-keeping operations these days, more efforts should be made to effectively employ preventive diplomacy. If prevention has failed, the decision of the United Nations to get involved in actual conflicts should be made with discretion and prioritization. Greater focus should be given to address the modality of intervention and the means of securing necessary resources.
Finally, my delegation believes that ensuring an adequate financial base is a central prerequisite for any United Nations activity. The report shows that, as in previous years, the financial situation of the Organization has not seen any improvement over the past year. The fact that the chronic state of financial crisis has always been at the core of debates at the United Nations reflects the complexity of this problem. My delegation agrees with the Secretary-General's observation that the unpredictability and irregularity of contributions from Member States make it extremely difficult to manage the Organization effectively.
As one of the Member States which appreciates the necessity of consistent and faithful payment of assessed contributions, the Republic of Korea shares the concern expressed by the Secretary-General to the General Assembly regarding the gravity of the financial situation of the United Nations. My Government will carefully study the ideas of the Secretary-General for extricating the Organization from its financial predicament and make further comments on them at the appropriate time.
The Secretary-General's report on the work of the Organization, contained in document A/49/1 of 2 September 1994, is a valued and painstaking human endeavour to make this world a better place to live in. One can say with confidence that the report reflects the Secretary-General's eagerness to translate the hopes and aspirations of the international community, to move beyond the mistakes and hesitation of the past, even the near past, and set the ongoing human march in the right direction, towards realizing the respect and dignity of every individual human being. As the task is no doubt difficult and cumbersome, the report ascends into heights of considerable achievements, then descends towards unaccomplished endeavours and finally lands on thorny grounds of bitter failures due to lack of either necessary funds and reporting or the necessary political will of some Member States.
It is thus a true reflection of our diverse tendencies. It is therefore evident that the Secretary-General in person, and the Organization in general, require a true environment of cooperation and goodwill, with an absence of self-centred attitudes on the part of those who must be guided by impartiality.
The report dwells on a multitude of United Nations activities which are hard to cover in this limited statement. But on the whole we can safely say that its main thrust is the broader concept of the human aspect, a natural by-product of the preoccupations of the Secretary-General himself, already truly reflected in his "Agenda for Peace" and also in his intended "Agenda for Development". We commend the Secretary-General for his efforts. Success or failure, good or poor delivery, is attributable to the performance of those who are directly responsible for participating, evaluating and even adjudicating without malice or bad faith.
We cannot but agree with the report that peace and security are organically linked to development. But, as the report truly reflects, what we have so far witnessed in developmental activities and collective thinking is not enough. The attainment of genuine peace and security essentially means uprooting the lingering causes of conflicts. Long-term development in its wider meaning is the answer and the remedy. But, just as we concur with the report that peace, a good economy, the environment, and societies and good governance intermarry to produce development, and just as we equally concur that peace, justice, human rights and development are necessary prerequisites for the advancement and welfare of nations, it is equally important to ascertain their universality in application and practice. Certain States cannot simply impose their own interpretations and applications of these lofty concepts on others indiscriminately. Different nations adopt different applications, which are also sound and just. The commitment remains the same however.
It is against this background that we view the efforts of the Organization to realize and cement peace and security world wide. The strategic preoccupations of big nations, whether military, economic or political, should not devour the interests or aspirations of smaller nations. Democratic norms can never be applied ready-made. Each nation has the right to apply the form of democracy most suitable to satisfying the political, social and religious inclinations of its own citizens. The objective is the real contribution of citizens in self-rule, good governance and full accountability to the people.
Allow me to go into somewhat greater detail.
Sudan fully supports the continuing process of streamlining the structures and work of all United Nations bodies. But what we aspire to is perfection with the least expense, achievements without overlooking important areas or issues.
The role of the General Assembly in the maintenance of international peace and security should be strengthened in order to achieve equity with the Security Council.
As for the enlargement of the Security Council and how it should function, we support the input of the non-aligned countries in this respect. In broad terms, we believe that membership of the Security Council, permanent or non-permanent, is a responsibility by proxy and not a privilege and that the Council represents a sensitive scale that must be balanced and not unbalanced, a platform on which to spell out the real attitudes and convictions of the whole international community and not a sanctuary for those who want to govern the world. In this context we feel that it is of special importance that the group entrusted with the task of looking to improve the work of the Council should broaden its contacts to include regional organizations, whose role in maintaining regional peace and security is still marginalized. We are particularly worried that the Council is increasingly tilting towards inconsistency and clandestine methods of work.
There must, we believe, be strict guiding principles for peace-keeping operations. The non-aligned have offered a handsome contribution in this respect.
As for regional conflicts, we continue to emphasize the fact that sustained economic growth and equitable functioning of the world economy are the most appropriate approaches. This can clearly be seen in the case of developing countries.
The experience involved in the creation of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is an evolving one. The report gives considerable space to this. But, as this experience is still under way, we continue to support the ideas presented by the non-aligned with a view to consolidating the High Commissioner's mandate. But on the whole we do not concur with the continuing inclination to use the pretext of the protection of human rights as a political excuse to interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign States. Respect for human rights should be universal; and human rights should be strictly observed by all States.
In the Secretary-General's report the situation in the Sudan is described as follows:
"The Sudan remains one of the most enduring and serious humanitarian crises in the world." (A/49/1, para. 355)
We consider this statement to be highly generalized, not really factual, rather inflammatory and motivated by the idea of exerting pressure on Sudan. The Arabic translation gives the statement a more strident tone and shows a subjective approach. The figures quoted concerning the number who have died because of the hostilities or the number who were displaced are far from true. The total is stated to be 6 million. The truth is that the entire population of the southern Sudan in time of peace does not reach that figure. The truth also is that about 3 million inhabitants of the south have moved northwards seeking protection from the inhuman treatment and banditry of all the rebel factions. We would have preferred truthfulness, accuracy and professionalism in this type of description.
The report also speaks of cases of the Government's non-cooperation with some non-governmental organizations which has allegedly contributed to obstructing the delivery of emergency aid to those in need. The truth is that the Government has established a large commission to facilitate the work of non-governmental organizations in Sudan. It has successfully concluded an agreement encompassing every non-governmental organization operating in the country. It also consented to their request to choose five of their number as coordinators with governmental authorities. I should like to confirm from this rostrum that the large majority of these organizations are operating in all tranquillity with all the Sudanese authorities concerned. Some, however, tend to exceed their mandate and meddle in the internal affairs of the country. Sudan is not the only example; similar examples can be cited from various parts of the world. The sense of mission should not overlap the humanitarian outlook of these organizations. Public opinion in their own constituencies at home should not blind them to the truth as they see it in reality, on the ground. In this respect, Sudan accepts the testimony of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and other non-governmental organizations.
I find it my duty to inform this body, as my Minister did earlier, that the Government of Sudan has made extensive strides in its untiring search for a peaceful settlement of this conflict, inflamed by external interference. Our efforts, however, will continue to be in vain if we are not left alone to settle our differences. As the Sudan Government has, in good faith, signed three Sudan Lifeline operations agreements, it is time for the world to condemn the rebel movements that are obstructing, looting and confiscating food and medicine aid. The United Nations authorities have adequately proved this. My delegation will take up this matter again at a later stage, during the consideration of this item in the appropriate Committee.
First of all I should like to join others in thanking the Secretary-General and his staff for the comprehensive report on the work of the Organization (A/49/1). It demonstrates once again the increasing demands made on the United Nations and the Secretary-General.
Whereas during the forty-eighth session of the General Assembly much attention was devoted to the development and improvement of peace-keeping activities based on "An Agenda for Peace" (A/47/27), this year we must once again focus our work on the problems of economic and social development. We welcome the intention of the Secretary-General to correct the misperception that the United Nations is primarily devoted to peace-keeping. Important as this field of activities is, the United Nations will succeed in its purpose "to maintain international peace and security" only if it deals with the roots of instability. We share the view of the Secretary-General that many conflicts have economic and social origins. The prevention of conflicts must therefore start at their roots. In this context the Agenda for Development must be the centrepiece of our work.
In his report "An Agenda for Development" (A/48/935), the Secretary-General has provided us with an in-depth analysis of the foundations of international cooperation for development. The fundamental changes in the political situation and in economic policy world wide have created a new environment in which we have a real chance of "bringing to fulfilment a renewed vision of development". The Agenda for Development must complement the Agenda for Peace as there is a clear interrelationship between peace and development.
Without peace there can be no development, and without development we will face increasing insecurity and conflicts in many parts of the world. A new framework for addressing new dimensions of development, including the role the United Nations could play is indeed strongly needed.
These past years have made us understand that development is of a very complex nature and that it is not enough to promote simple economic growth. That is why my Government strongly supports the concept of the five dimensions of development identified and defined in the Report of the Secretary-General. They should be seen as part of an integrated concept of sustainable human development. The addendum to be prepared by the Secretary-General should be built upon these five dimensions in order to reach a number of operational conclusions.
We share the view expressed in the Secretary-General's report "An Agenda for Development" that there is a clear li