Sir, I should like to begin my statement by
extending to you our sincere congratulations on
your election to the presidency of this session.
This is a fitting tribute to your country and to
you personally. We are gratified to note that, at
this crucial time when the United Nations is
being put to severe tests by ever-escalating
tension and conflicts, as well as increasing
economic problems, the membership of the
Organization has entrusted a conscientious and
able statesman with the task of steering us
through this difficult course. I should also like
to pay a tribute to your predecessor, Mr.
Kittani, who presided over the thirty-sixth
session of the General Assembly with efficiency,
dignity and wisdom. We have noted with
appreciation the commendable efforts continually
expended by the Secretary-General in reasserting
the authority of the Organization and putting it
to the service of nations in time of conflict. In
extending a formal welcome and hearty
congratulations to him on his election to the
post, I pledge my country's fullest co-operation
with him in the years to come.
Since the last session, the international
community, particularly the Organization, has
been confronted with trying times and challenging
issues. The world watched in horror at the damage
in Lebanon. We stood helpless as the conflict in
the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) degenerated into
armed confrontation and took its toll. There is
almost a subtle sense of resignation as continues
to devise the most brutal means of subjugating
the people in South Africa. The Namibian people
continue to be condemned to racist South Africa's
illegal occupation and colonialism. And an end to
the sad Iranian-Iraqi war continues to elude us.
We are at present witnessing one of the most
disturbing periods in the post-war era. The
delicate balance so painstakingly fashioned over
the many years through the process of
international dialogue and detente is giving way
to tension and confrontation. The procedures for
the settlement of disputes which were so
laboriously created have almost lost their
influence over the trend of international
relations. Today tension prevails in all areas of
the world. Confrontation and outright resort to
force become common means of settling disputes.
The fundamental question is whether peace and
security can be maintained in an environment
where there is genuine concern that recourse to
lawlessness will go unpunished by the
international community or, at worst, be received
with acquiescence by Members of the Organization.
The politics of force, so reminiscent of the
cold- war era, seem to be creeping back, thus
poisoning the international political atmosphere.
As a consequence, the global consensus that had
evolved regarding various problems in the world,
stands to be brushed aside by this resurgence of
cold-war politics. In various parts of the world,
perennial problems have continued to be resistant
to solutions and new crisis situations have
emerged.
Peace is a deliberate process. To achieve peace,
we must embark on a clear, deliberate and
determined road in the search for solutions to
the existing conflicts and look into viable means
of averting those that are simmering. But we
cannot do so unless our resolve is definite and
our determination unflinching. We cannot do so
unless we remain faithful to the ideals of the
Charter and are willing to give it a chance to
work. For Member States will be defeating the
very purpose of their signatures to the Charter
if, on the one hand, they extol its ideals and,
on the other, pursue policies aimed at
undermining it.
constitutes constant aggression against the
people of South Africa and a serious threat to
international peace and security. It is a fact
that apartheid is not invincible. But the
struggle for its elimination is frustrated by the
direct or indirect support the regime receives
from some Members of the Organization. These
Members, none the less, increase their
co-operation with and support for that regime. We
need not recount the number of times the
international community has been preventedfrom
taking action by the use of the veto. We need not
remind the Assembly that the issue of
comprehensive sanctions against that regime
remains frozen, solely because of the
unwillingness of some permanent members of the
Security Council to consider it seriously. We
need not spell out all the areas of economic and
political, as well as military, co-operation.
Regrettably, these obstacles placed on the path
of the freedom struggle in South Africa have the
effect of reinforcing the apartheid regime and
making it even more insensitive to reason and
more defiant of world opinion. The overall effect
is to block the peaceful means towards the
elimination of the scourge of . When peaceful
avenues are thus blocked, the freedom fighters
are left with no other option but to resort to
armed resistance. The message which comes out
loud and clear from the land of
is that the people of that unhappy land are
prepared to make supreme sacrifices for their
freedom and for their dignity. In concert with
the rest of Africa, we reaffirm our support for
and solidarity with the South African people and
we reiterate our conviction that the
international community can make an important
contribution to that struggle if it shoulders its
proper responsibility and institutes appropriate
measures.
Today, almost two decades after this body
terminated the Mandate of South Africa and
assumed direct responsibility for the Territory,
the people of Namibia continue to be deprived of
their most basic human rights It is indeed a sad
commentary on the efficacy of the United Nations
that Namibia should continue to be subjected to
racism, colonialism and human suffering. The
continued illegal occupation of that
international Territory by South Africa is a
flagrant violation of international law and
constitutes an affront to world conscience and to
the fundamental dignity of mankind.
The regime has a unique record of flouting
international opinion. Inside Namibia it has
unleashed a reign of terror against the people of
the international Territory and particularly
against the leadership and the heroic combatants
of the South West Africa People's Organization.
The regime has also been busy propping up
internal surrogates in an attempt to facilitate
the imposition of a neo-colonial solution to the
problem.
On the other hand, South Africa has been engaged
in a systematic campaign of destabilization of
the neighboring African States. Using the
international Territory of Namibia as a launching
pad, it has repeatedly committed blatant acts of
aggression against the People's Republic of
Angola and, in the process, has inflicted damage
and destruction to life and property. Women and
children and other innocent civilians have been
its constant victims and for more than one year
now it has occupied parts of southern Angola,
notwithstanding the international outcry and
condemnation. Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe
have also been subjected to aggression while the
apartheid regime has continued its pressures on
Botswana and subversion against the Kingdom of
Lesotho. A part of its conspiracy against these
African States, South Africa has been training,
financing and equipping mercenaries to cause
instability in some of them. All these acts
constitute a clear threat to the security and
stability of the region, with dangerous
implications for international peace and
security. They can be ignored only at our
collective peril.
Negotiations on the question of Namibia have
become a saga of disappointment and frustration.
Whenever there were prospects for a light at the
end of the tunnel, those prospects were shattered
by the introduction of new and unreasonable
demands in the negotiating process. While we have
been engaged in the negotiations aimed at
securing a peaceful settlement to the Namibian
question, we have maintained that: first,
Security Council resolution 435 (1978) remains
the basis for achieving independence for Namibia
and thus there is a need to have it implemented
without delay; secondly, the Western contact
group, at whose diplomatic initiative the plan
for the independence of Namibia was originally
conceived and which possesses considerable
leverage over South Africa, has a duty to see to
it that the plan is implemented; and thirdly, the
central role of the Organization in working for
the independence of the Territory must be
underlined.
Over the last few months the front-line States,
SWAPO and Nigeria have been engaged in
constructive consultations with the Western
contact group regarding the implementation of
resolution 435 (1978). We regret that, although
some progress has been made, some issues remain
outstanding. But the main obstacle remains the
intransigence of the South African regime and
this defiance by the South African authorities is
regrettably assisted by the introduction into the
negotiating process of an extraneous issue.
It is thus a matter of deep regret that a non-
issue should be made to pose as a difficulty. The
attempt to link the independence of Namibia with
the withdrawal of Cuban forces from Angola poses
a serious danger of derailing the entire
exercise. The fact that this concept of linkage
is now euphemistically called parallelism does
not in any way change the substance of that
policy. We have made it clear that this issue is
against the letter and the spirit of Security
Council resolution 435 (1978) and constitutes
interference in the internal affairs of a
sovereign State. This position was reiterated by
the heads of State and Government of the
front-line States and by the President of SWAPO
in their communique issued at the?? summit in
Lusaka on 4 September this year. When we consider
the painstaking efforts that have been made by
all concerned with a view to achieving a
negotiated solution to this seemingly intractable
problem, it would be very sad indeed if these
efforts were eventually to crumble because of an
insistence on injecting into negotiations an
issue which is totally alien to resolution 435
(1978). We are, in connection, gratified by the
clear statement made by the Foreign Minister of
France, Mr. Claude Cheyís son; in his press
conference in Dar-es-Salaam yesterday, he made it
very clear that France rejects the issue of
linkage,
Freedom and independence for peoples and
countries are principles we hold sacrosanct. It
is in consonance with this policy that we have
supported and shall continue to support the right
of the people of Western Sahara to
self-determination and independence. It is a
right which is engrained in the Charter of the
United Nations and that of the Organization of
African Unity Thus while we search for a
solution to the problem of Western Sahara, my
country will continue to be guided by its
commitment to these principles.
Another tragic example of the powerlessness of
the international community is the situation in
Lebanon. The ongoing tragedy, with its
implications for the sovereignty and integrity of
a nation and the elementary human rights of the
Lebanese and Palestinian people, is threatening
to lead the entire region down the path of total
conflagration. The Israeli occupation of Lebanon,
the brutal war Israel has perpetrated against the
Palestinians, the siege of Beirut and the
dreadful massacres at Sabra and Shatila are a
clear demonstration of the dangerously
deteriorating situation in the area. Israel has
invaded and continues to occupy the territory of
a sovereign Member of the Organization. It bears
responsibility for the murder of innocent
Palestinian women and children. Perhaps one
cannot adequately express in words the suffering,
torment and the humiliation which the surviving
people are being subjected to under Israeli
occupation.
We pay homage to the Lebanese and the Palestinian
people for their heroism and steadfastness. We
honor their monumental sacrifices, made in the
cause of preserving their dignity and in the
fight for what is right and just. We also pay a
tribute to the Palestine Liberation Organization,
which in a time of such profound crisis has
demonstrated outstanding courage and
statesmanship.
Tanzania reiterates its firm belief that the
restoration of peace and security will come about
not through policies of military adventurism on
the part of Israel, but through the promotion of
the fundamental attributes of peace. A genuine
and lasting peace hinges upon the enjoyment by
the Palestinian people of their inalienable right
to self-determination, including the right to
establish an independent state of their own. The
acquisition of territory by force is
inadmissible, and hence Israel must withdraw from
all the occupied territories. In consonance with
that principle it must equally be underlined that
respect for the sovereignty and territorial
integrity of all States in the area is a
necessary condition for the attainment of a
genuine, viable and lasting solution to the
problem.
The war between Iraq and the Islamic Republic of
Iran continues to be a matter of great concern to
my country. We regret the fact that the two non-
aligned neighbors are still engulfed in a
seemingly unending war which has already claimed
heavy casualties and has led to appalling
devastation, of property. My country has actively
supported, and will continue to support, the
mediations efforts of the United Nations, the
non-aligned movement and the Organization of the
Islamic Conference, as well as those of
individual countries which have sought to find a
speedy, peaceful and lasting resolution of the
conflict. In that connection, we note with
appreciation the considerable efforts expended by
the current Chairman of the non-aligned movement.
Thus, we once more renew our appeal to the
parties to the conflict through negotiations to
bring about an end to the current conflict.
Last year we expressed optimism over the
situation in Cyprus. The momentum which has been
injected into the intercommunal talks with the
submission of comprehensive proposals
encompassing both the territorial and
constitutional aspects of the problem seems,
unfortunately, to have lapsed. The persistence of
this problem continues to plunge that tormented
country into deeper division. My delegation will
continue to support the efforts to promote
dialogue and to search for a political framework
within which the problem can be settled. We
remain hopeful that the parties to the conflict
will demonstrate a genuine willingness to
co-operate fully with the representatives of the
Secretary-General in evolving a mutually
acceptable framework for bringing the tragedy to
an end through the restoration of that country's
unity and territorial integrity, as well as
through the preservation of its sovereignty,
independence and non-alignment.
Tanzania supports the noble efforts of the Korean
people towards the peaceful reunification of
their country. At the same time we firmly believe
that the withdrawal of all foreign troops from
the area would be a significant step towards
ushering in a dialogue between the two parts of
Korea, aimed at eventually bringing about
peaceful reunification.
Both in Afghanistan and Kampuchea, there must be
concerted efforts on our part to settle the
outstanding problems on the basis of respect for
the principles of sovereignty,, territorial
integrity and nonintervention in the internal
affairs of those States, to do this, however,
there must be a willingness on the part of
everyone to evolve a political framework within
which these problems can be solved. For our part,
we shall continue to support initiatives which
are aimed at finding a political path to their
final settlement.
We view with deep disappointment the sterility of
the many disarmament negotiations which have so
far taken place. The second special session on
disarmament was particularly disappointing. It
reflected the trend away from a serious pursuit
of disarmament. The arms race, far from being
curbed, has been given a new and powerful
impetus. The politics of force are threatening to
destroy the fragile fabric of detente as
preparations for war continue without let.
Weapons are being perfected and new and more
sophisticated ones roll from the assembly lines.
Military budgets are at a record high. Notions of
limited nuclear war and of so-called enhanced
security through nuclear superiority seem to be
working to undermine the basic climate of
searching for peace through disarmament which has
all this time been the cornerstone of all the
negotiations. In sum, the spectre of a holocaust
haunts the world as the international situation
creates the possibility of an international
conflagration.
The politics of power have dangerously made
countries prisoners of their own perceived sense
of insecurity, which has in tum fuelled the race
for more armaments. A new and courageous approach
is needed to get out of this vicious circle. In
that exercise, priority should be given to
nuclear disarmament, for nuclear weapons pose the
most immediate threat to the very survival of
mankind.
The Indian Ocean is close to our continent of
Africa, and the Assembly, more than 10 years ago,
adopted the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a
Zone of Peace to rid that area of military
rivalry. But events are going in the exact
opposite direction. The Indian Ocean is being
further militarized by rival Powers. Contrary to
the desire of the littoral and hinterland States
for peace and security in the area, new foreign
military bases are being established and nuclear
warships and other weaponry are being introduced
into the area. The ever-increasing foreign
military presence and the rivalry of the great
Powers put the peace of the countries in the
Indian Ocean region further in jeopardy. We have
also witnessed the regrettable obstruction by
certain Powers of the holding of the Conference
on the Indian Ocean. That situation calls for
action. We therefore believe that, now more than
ever, the Conference on the Indian Ocean is
necessary.
To an impoverished people, peace and security
means more food, shelter and security from the
scourge of economic underdevelopment. Because the
arms race fritters away so much of the scarce
resources and manpower while the majority of the
people of the world live in abject poverty and
misery may delegation sees those two elements as
inextricably linked: linked, on the one hand, by
the coexistence between lavish expenditure on
armaments and the need for economic development;
and, on the other hand, by the insecurity created
by those armaments and that caused by economic
hopelessness.
In considering this close interrelationship
between disarmament and development, therefore,
the need to ensure that disarmament makes viable
contributions to the social and economic
development of the developing countries, and
particularly to the establishment of the new
international economic order, is an imperative
one.
All States Members of the United Nations do
recognize the gravity of the deepening world
economic crisis. Short-term measures adopted by
certain developed countries in attempts to
stimulate global economic recovery have failed to
bring about the desired results. The crucial need
to adopt a more realistic approach in order to
eliminate the structural disequilibrium which
characterizes the existing inequitable
international economic system is becoming self-
evident. .
Although the impact of the deteriorating world
economic situation is increasingly being felt by
the developed countries, it is the developing
countries which continue to bear the brunt of
this crisis because of the vulnerability of their
poor economies to the unfavorable external
conditions. These conditions, which are
themselves structural in character, are made even
worse by the unilateral adjustment measures
adopted by some developed countries without due
regard to their negative impact f*n the economies
of the developing countries. Thus, for example,
the protectionist measures against the raw
materials and manufactured goods exported by the
developing countries have led to a continued
deterioration in the terms of trade of the
developing countries. Many developing countries
are having severe balance-of-payments problems.
Yet the international monetary and financial
institutions created to deal with such problems
have proved insensitive to the development needs
of the third world.
Interdependence among nations can be of mutual
benefit to all countries only if we also
recognize imperative need to act collectively in
our search for appropriate solutions to the
global economic problems. But the international
community is not inking in its recognition of the
need for collective action on those problems.
Through numerous resolutions and declarations,
the Assembly has repeatedly appealed to all
Members of the Organization to engage in
meaningful negotiations with a view to
implementing the goals and objectives of the new
international economic order. General Assembly
resolution 34/138, on the launching of global
negotiations relating to international economic
co-operation for development, still offers the
best framework for the comprehensive,coherent and
integrated treatment of the interrelated issues
in the field of raw materials, energy, trade,
development, money and finance.
Even at the risk of appearing repetitive, it
should be stressed that what has been lacking is
the necessary political will, particularly on the
part of certain developed countries, to translate
the desires of the international community into
concrete action. And it is disappointing to note
that some developed countries still insist on
certain conditions which continue to delay the
launching of these much-desired global
negotiations. We wish, therefore, to express our
sincere hope that all Member States represented
here will rededicate their efforts at this
current session to facilitating the launching of
the global negotiations without further delay.
Towards this objective my delegation pledges its
full co-operation. We firmly believe that it is
only through dialogue and negotiation that
nations can find commonly acceptable solutions to
their common problems, for the benefit of all the
peoples of the world.
There has been hardly any field in recent history
where so many interests have been involved, where
such interests have been so much at variance with
one another and where reconciliation has been so
complex a pursuit as the law to govern the oceans
and seas of the world. If, therefore, there is
one contemporary example of what the world
community of nations can achieve through
collective endeavors when such efforts are
coupled with political will and a determination
to succeed, it is the just-concluded United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Nobody has been, or could be, fully satisfied
with it. It is, after all, the product of
give-and-take. Indeed, many of us believe that
more justice could have been done. That
notwithstanding, we are confident that the
Convention constitutes an adequate basis for the
promotion of justice in the use of the oceans and
a commendable step in the establishment of the
new international economic order. We join those
who have called for its signature and
ratification and therefore entry into force as
soon as possible. So historic an achievement is
too momentous to waste, and the consequences of a
fault would inevitably be too grave for all of us.
It is evident that none of the problems facing
humanity are completely beyond solution. The
issue is not whether a solution is possible or
not. Rather, it is how much longer these problems
can wait to be solved—whether time is still on
our side. Some problems constitute merely a
threat to the well-being of man; some prolong
suffering: and others are leading us to
self-destruction. Our choices are not very many.
But the decisions are ours, and the power to
exercise our will is also ours. But time is not
indefinitely on our side.