Libya

It gives me great pleasure to congratulate Mr. Razali Ismail on his election as President of this session of the General Assembly. His assumption of that high post is a tribute to him personally and to his country, Malaysia, with which my country has good relations and close ties enhanced by bonds of friendship and cooperation. My delegation is confident that his political experience and diplomatic skill will help us in achieving a successful session. He has taken over the presidency from his predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Diego Freitas do Amaral of Portugal. I should like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to him for the way he conducted the affairs of the fiftieth session of the General Assembly. Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali has shown great skill in conducting the affairs of the Organization by virtue of his long experience, his wide knowledge of world affairs and his grasp of the substance of regional conflicts. That is why he enjoys our full support in continuing at the helm of the Organization. Since he enjoys worldwide support, as expressed by several regional organizations, we are confident that the Assembly will support his reelection to the post of Secretary-General of the Organization so that 19 he may continue the process he started in the field of restructuring and strengthening the United Nations and enhancing its role to enable it fully to shoulder its responsibilities in realizing the purposes of the Charter, namely, the establishment of peace, justice and equality and the promotion of development. This session is convened in the aftermath of important events and in the midst of vast developments. The Fourth World Conference on Women achieved good results. Attempts are being made to overcome economic difficulties, promote development, and eliminate phenomena that threaten the environment. It is a good omen that this session is starting at a time when optimism is rising as a result of the progress achieved in settling the dispute in the Balkans. But if satisfaction at such happy developments has been widespread, concern has deepened over the persistence of chronic disturbances and the eruption of destructive civil wars. To confront these events, which threaten international peace and security, the international community must exert greater effort to contain such disturbances and wars. In this context, it is essential to remove the obstacles hampering the implementation of peace agreements in Angola and Liberia. A definitive solution must be implemented for the ethnic disputes in Rwanda and Burundi. The brotherly people of Somalia continue to suffer from long-standing problems. They expect our support for a reconciliation that would meet the needs of all Somalis and respond to their hopes and aspirations. An end should be put to the suffering of the brotherly people of Iraq by lifting the sanctions, maintaining the unity and territorial integrity of Iraq and desisting from premeditated attempts to impinge on its sovereignty and its freedom in decision- making. My country is extremely concerned at the latest developments in Iraq. The United States aggression against Iraq is a violation of its sovereignty and an interference in its internal affairs. We have confirmed and confirm again today that Iraq has the right to territorial integrity and to exercise sovereignty over its entire territory. For the United States of America to consider that Iraq’s exercise of its sovereign rights constitutes aggression, at a time when Iraq is being subjected to United States aggression, is reverse logic that must be denounced and condemned by the international community. The conflict in the Middle East, with the question of Palestine at its core, has been among the priority issues at the United Nations for more than half a century. Now, despite all the talk about the peace process, the fact remains that the Palestinian people continue to be displaced from their homeland. Those who remain are oppressed by the Israelis by collective siege and random deportation, in total disregard of international denunciation of such practices and in complete defiance of the international will, which supports the legitimate struggle of the Palestinian people and calls for respect for international decisions calling for the full realization of all the rights of the Palestinian people, in particular their right to return to their homeland and their right to self- determination. As we have seen ever since the usurpation of the land of Palestine by the Israelis, the fact is that occupation and expansion have always been a constant policy to realize israeli ambitions. Their settlement activities increase daily. Their jails are filled with thousands of prisoners. Houses are demolished for no reason. Rash Israeli statements that the Palestinians have no right to a State of their own are often repeated, along with acts of aggression against southern Lebanon. The Israelis are also perpetuating their occupation of the Syrian Golan. They persevere in the judaization of Jerusalem, including their designs to demolish the most important Islamic shrine, namely, the Holy Al-Aqsa Mosque. These Israeli actions prove that the Israelis do not want peace. Their joining the so-called peace process is nothing more than a smoke screen to hide their attempts to impose their will on the Arab nation and make it bow in submission, thus setting a seal on their occupation and their sense of superiority. My country has publicly declared that the current so-called peace arrangements will not lead to a genuine and lasting solution. Events have proved the validity of our analysis and the depth of our vision. Just, true and comprehensive peace will not be achieved so long as the Israelis are shedding the blood of the Palestinian people. Peace will not be sustainable under the shadow of Israel’s nuclear terrorism and its obstinate denial of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people. Peace can come only through the return of the Palestinians to their homeland and the establishment of an independent, democratic State in Palestine, with Holy Jerusalem as its capital and where Palestinian Arabs and Jews would live on an equal footing — similar to what has happened in South Africa. Anything other than that solution would ignore historical facts and lack realism, and would only lead to more 20 bloodshed and keep the area as a pocket of tension where nobody enjoys peace or security. Five years ago, three western countries — the United States of America, Britain and France — accused Libyan citizens of involvement in the Pan American flight 103 accident and the incident involving the French union de tranports aérens (UTA) flight 772. Despite the fact that those who unleashed those accusations never submitted any proof or evidence to support their claims, my country has declared its readiness to uncover all the facts related to the two incidents. We started an investigation of those whom the American and the British authorities claim are involved in the Pan American flight 103 incident. My country has also called on the authorities in these countries to assist with the investigation. Instead of responding to this request, which falls within the legal framework of the dispute, the three countries have fully politicized the problem, resorted to the Security Council and imposed Council resolution 731 (1992). Despite all this, and out of our keen desire to settle all aspects of the dispute, the Jamahiriya announced its acceptance of that resolution and took practical measures in response to it. The Jamahiriya has condemned international terrorism in all its forms and has declared its commitment to any measures to be decided by the international community to combat terrorism. Libya’s vehement determination to secure the total eradication of terrorism is reflected in the civilized proposal contained in document A/46/840, which calls for the convening of a special session of the General Assembly to study the causes and dimensions of this phenomenon and devise the means that would eliminate it. The Jamahiriya has also cooperated with the Government of the United Kingdom in uncovering the elements accused by Britain of involvement in terrorist acts. In the statement, circulated in document S/1995/973 of 20 November 1995, the British informed the Security Council that Libya’s answers to their queries about the relationship with the provisional Irish Republic Army were satisfactory and conformed with their expectations. Furthermore, Libya has cooperated with the French investigating magistrate who visited Libya during the period 5 to 16 July 1996. During that visit, the Libyan authorities provided him with all the facilities he needed to conclude his mission. Later, French statements paid tribute to the positive cooperation of the Libyan authorities with the French magistrate. The Jamahiriya has proposed several solutions for the trial of the two Libyans suspected of involvement in the United States plane’s accident. It has proposed that the two stand trial before a court whose venue should be agreed upon. Libya has also proposed recourse to the International Court of Justice after the United States and Britain refused to apply the Montreal Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation of 1971, despite the fact that both countries are parties to the Convention. Libya has also accepted the proposal submitted by the League of Arab States, which calls for trying the two suspects at the headquarters of the International Court of Justice in The Hague, before Scottish judges and under Scottish law. These proposed solutions which were either submitted or accepted by the Jamahiriya have been confirmed on more than one occasion and before several forums, including this Assembly. This is a sufficient response to those who claim that Libya refuses to permit the trial of the two suspects, and especially to President Clinton, who said in his statement on 23 September that Libya refuses to surrender the persons responsible for the explosion of Pan American flight 103. Libya has no objection to the two suspects standing trial. The only thing that Libya wants is to guarantee them a neutral and fair trial, free from any media or political influences. We ask this especially because officials in both Britain and the United States, in their statements, have claimed that the two Libyan citizens are guilty and should be punished, indicating that a conviction is pre-ordained before any investigation and before any court appearance. The Jamahiriya’s handling of the dispute has been widely supported internationally and by Arab and African countries. The Organization of the Islamic Conference has declared its solidarity with our position. The Movement of Non-Aligned Countries supported it at Jakarta and reaffirmed that support at Cartagena. It was also strongly supported by the Arab Summit at Cairo. The Organization of African Unity has repeatedly supported it, from the 1993 Cairo Summit through the latest Summit at Yaoundé. When the three countries were confronted by these positions, which confirmed the firm conviction that Libya has indeed responded to the requirements of Security Council resolutions, they started to drag other issues far removed from the dispute and its context. Both Britain and the United States are trying to evade responsibility for fabricating the problem. They have been attempting to depict the dispute as one between Libya and the 21 international community. Is this not a reversal of the facts? How can the dispute be one between Libya and the international community, when international support is increasing daily for the Libyan position? This support is embodied in the support of regional and international organizations, the population of whose members exceeds two thirds of the world’s population. Those two Governments have now come up with a new lie. They say that Libya is defying international legality. The facts totally refute this. Libya is one of the countries most committed to international law. Proof of this is its implementation of the verdict of the International Court of Justice in its territorial dispute with Chad, even though this was not in our favour. Furthermore, officials in those two countries claim that Libya is not a peace-loving State. This is another lie. The Jamahiriya is a peace-loving country. It believes in peace and practices it. Its role in the peaceful settlement of disputes between States has been embodied in its active role in trying to achieve reconciliation between Sudan and Uganda. It has also been reflected in its successful efforts at reconciling the Philippines and the Moro National Liberation Front. Raising what has become known as the Lockerbie crisis falls within the context of these false allegations and fabricated accusations. It confirms a fact that we have stated right from the beginning: that this is a premeditated, fabricated problem aimed at punishing the Libyan people for certain principles in which they believe and certain positions they defend. It is as if those who created this crisis were not content with the difficulties and pains which the Libyan people have already suffered at the hands of the colonialists and the fascists who, on our territory, fought a war that killed and displaced hundreds of thousands of Libyans, and planted in their farms and under their homes millions of land mines which still kill innocent people and impede Libya’s efforts to protect the environment, combat desertification, and expand in the fields of economic and social development. If the aim behind the fabrication of the crisis was not to punish us for certain principles we uphold and certain positions we defend, why did the two countries refuse from the start to apply the relevant international convention — the Montreal Convention? Why did they drag the Security Council into this legal problem, which has nothing whatsoever to do with its functions? Why did they hasten to impose sanctions on us only two months after the start of this crisis? How did these countries accord themselves the right to participate in the voting on Security Council resolution 731 (1992), in contravention of Article 27 (3) of the Charter? Why do the British and American Governments reject any initiative to settle the dispute by dialogue and negotiation? What is the justification for their intransigence in rejecting the proposal of the League of Arab States that was accepted by Libya? Why do these States insist on accusing our citizens when new facts have been uncovered and published in several books and newspapers refuting their claims and confirming that the incident was planned by professional intelligence services to coverup certain suspicious activities? Also, why did these States push the Security Council to adopt a double standard, imposing sanctions on Libya under Chapter VII of the Charter when it did not threaten anybody or in any way compromise international peace and security. At the same time, these countries prevented the Security Council from applying the same Chapter to a major power that sent hundreds of its war planes to attack our country and bomb our cities while their residents lay sleeping in their beds? This same big Power still practises State terrorism against us, freezing our financial assets and imposing unilateral sanctions on us, refusing to respond to General Assembly resolution 41/38, which calls on it to compensate our people for the losses they suffered as a result of its brutal aggression against us in April 1986. The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya has sought to settle the dispute. All it has asked for is that it be settled in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the rules of international law. My country is satisfied because its handling of this crisis was supported by most countries of the world. And here I would like to pay tribute to the members of the Non- Aligned Movement, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the Organization of African Unity and the League of Arab States for their appreciation of our position and their understanding of our earnestness in seeking a quick and just solution. In particular, we would like to thank members of the Security Council who appreciated our response, tried to do us justice and sought to lift the unjust sanctions imposed on us. The magnitude of the suffering of the Libyan people under the sanctions has been detailed in document S/1996/717. Suffice it to say that the sanctions have so far resulted in the deaths of 3,340 persons in road accidents. More than 12,000 persons have suffered serious permanent injuries because of these accidents. Moreover, the sanctions have cost more than $18 billion in material losses. There is no excuse for condoning such injustice, and the continuation of this injustice is wrong. Most countries 22 of the world have repeated their calls for an accelerated solution of the Lockerbie crisis, in accordance with international laws and conventions. The Jamahiriya has accepted that. The obstacle lies in the blind intransigence and illogical demands of the American and British Governments. Should the two Governments persist in their uncompromising positions, refuse to settle the dispute in a spirit of justice and fairness, and relieve the suffering our people have endured for more than four years, the only thing left to the Libyan people would be to appeal to those in this forum with clean consciences to intensify their efforts in order to expose the unjust practices exercised by the United States and Britain to extend the duration of the blockade imposed on a small people. Members of this Assembly should implement the decisions taken by the Heads of State and Government of the Non-Aligned Movement in Cartagena, by the Arab Heads of State at the Cairo summit and by the African Heads of State in the Yaoundé summit not to continue compliance with the sanctions resolutions. They should also consider possible ways of sparing the Libyan people more losses if the western countries persist in rejecting initiatives for a peaceful solution. The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya attaches the utmost importance to the establishment of security and the enhancement of cooperation in the Mediterranean region. It reaffirms its conviction that stability in this area will be realized only through an end to military exercises in the Mediterranean, the closure of foreign military bases, the withdrawal of foreign fleets and the development of a sound formula, refuting the policy of exclusion, that would enable the Mediterranean countries to contribute to the enhancement of their security and the promotion of cooperation. By virtue of its distinct location in that region and the stability it enjoys, the Jamahiriya can play an important role in strengthening security in the Mediterranean by reducing migration from the southern coastal States to the North and the elimination of destructive movements that exploit and have been repudiated by Islam for undermining the stability of a number of littoral countries of the Mediterranean. The Jamahiriya would be able to play a bigger role in these fields if the sanctions imposed on it were lifted and external attempts to undermine its security and stability were to stop. My country supports the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons as a prelude to prohibiting and destroying all weapons of mass destruction. We welcome the international treaties and conventions concluded with a view to controlling these destructive weapons and their ultimate elimination. In particular, my country welcomes the conclusion of the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty. However, we believe that other measures should be taken to guarantee the total eradication of weapons of mass destruction, including a timetable for the destruction of these weapons. It is necessary to take drastic and punitive measures with regard to a major nuclear power that transported nuclear material to its own territory and still procrastinates in disposing of it under international supervision. It is also highly important to formulate an international instrument guaranteeing the security and safety of non-nuclear States. The Comprehensive Nuclear- Test-Ban Treaty recently approved by the General Assembly falls short of the aspirations of the peoples of the world to a total ban on all nuclear tests. As formulated, the Treaty merely perpetuates the status quo. It could even pre-empt efforts aimed at achieving a world totally free from nuclear terror. In the context of other steps that should be taken to eliminate nuclear weapons, it is essential to take serious international measures to guarantee the universality of the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The Jamahiriya has a special interest in this question because the region in which we live is greatly threatened by the fact that the Israelis possess terrifying nuclear weapons with over 200 nuclear warheads. They also have nuclear facilities that they refuse to place under international control. What adds to our concern is the fact that, in addition to the Israeli nuclear terror which threatens the lives of the residents of Arab cities and villages every day, a major nuclear Power not only turns a blind eye to this terror, but even works to develop and enhance it. This same major Power threatens any Arab country, even if it was merely building a pharmaceutical product factory under the pretext of saving the world from chemical weapons. The existence of the Israeli nuclear arsenal cannot be taken lightly or condoned. If the international community is truly keen to ensure the security and stability of our region, it should take measures to guarantee Israel’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the placing of their nuclear facilities under the International Atomic Energy Agency’s safeguards system. There must also be a timetable for dismantling their nuclear stockpiles. Should the failure to force Israel to do that continue, it would be legitimate for the countries in the area to acquire, in self-defence, means to guarantee their safety and enable them to face the Israeli nuclear threat to their very existence. 23 The world has witnessed colossal changes. If we are to adapt to these changes, we must restructure the United Nations to make it better able to respond to international needs and to meet the interests and wishes of Member States. My country has followed the negotiations aimed at strengthening the United Nations system and at reforming the Security Council. We believe that this process, pursued by Member States for some time now, should be accelerated and concluded, resulting in measures that could enhance the powers of the General Assembly, including on matters of international peace and security. We urge that the negotiations lead to steps that would enable the Security Council better to carry out its mandate, in conformity with the principles and purposes of the Charter. Any increase in the membership of the Security Council should be based not on a selective approach, but on the principles of the sovereign equality of States and equitable geographic distribution, taking into consideration the interests of the developing countries that constitute the majority of United Nations Member States. The veto privilege, which has become the focus of interest of most countries, should be at the core of the reform process. There is no longer any justification for maintaining this privilege. The new international arena needs a democratic Security Council, not one in which the few enjoy discriminatory rights. My country, which has been in the forefront of those calling for the abrogation of the veto power, once again urges that the measures aimed at reforming the Security Council include arrangements ultimately leading to the elimination of this privilege, which contradicts the principle of sovereign equality of States and also runs counter to democracy. Preserving it would impede the Organizations’s efforts to maintain and preserve international peace and security. The world cannot be secure until its economic problems and development are addressed. Looking at the international scene, we find that the economies and level of growth of most developing countries continue to languish. It is no exaggeration to state that these conditions may deteriorate further if effective measures are not taken to reverse them. The Charter of the United Nations is anchored on two basic pillars: the maintenance of international peace and security and international cooperation for economic and social development. The close connection between the two pillars requires the United Nations to strive to achieve both equally. We believe that no sound international economic environment can be possible without a true world partnership for development. This requires that North- South dialogue be resumed and that the developing countries be enabled to participate effectively in making decisions affecting international economic conditions. In this context, commitments for promoting development in developing countries should be undertaken in a realistic manner that would end trade protectionism against the exports of developing countries, lift restrictions on the transfer of technology to them and ensure the payment of remunerative prices for their commodities. It is essential that special priority be given to the economic situation in Africa and to the implementation of the United Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa in the 1990s. The western countries have a moral duty to help end underdevelopment in Africa, given the continent’s suffering under colonialism, when its wealth was plundered by these countries, which stole its natural resources and denied it opportunities for development and progress. As part of the efforts of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in the areas of economic development, environmental protection, expansion of agrarian reform and the provision of drinking water, the Libyan people, in the midst of their joy at the start of the twenty-eighth year of the 1 September revolution, have celebrated the conclusion of the second phase of the Great Man-Made River Project, whose waters have reached the city of Tripoli, where there is a dense population and arable land. The Libyan people have realized this achievement despite the ongoing embargo and the coercive economic practices imposed on it for over a decade. These measures were recently tightened by a law whose provisions are applicable to the companies of States that deal with us. This constitutes a flagrant violation of the purposes of the Charter of the United Nations and an intentional disregard for the rules of international law. It is also a clear contradiction of the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization. My country has followed with keen interest the reactions of anger and denunciation following the enactment of that law. We would like to express our satisfaction at the inclusion of an item on this matter on the General Assembly’s agenda for this session. We hope that member States will discuss this question, study it carefully and ultimately adopt a measure to thwart this law, through which the United States of America is attempting to impose its laws on the international community. This Assembly should take the necessary 24 effective measures to end all coercive economic arrangements being imposed on a number of developing countries, in implementation of the General Assembly resolutions prohibiting any country from enacting extra- territorial laws or resorting to coercive measures to force another country to relinquish the exercise of its sovereign rights. The next century is but a few years away. Before it begins, all the members of the international community should use the remaining time to eliminate all remnants of recent decades, which were characterized by tension and confrontation. As we enter the third millennium, we should live in a world governed by a system based on justice, equality and respect for the political and economic choices of peoples. Such a system should embody full commitment to international law and the principles and purposes of the United Nations. It must protect and enhance human rights and strengthen efforts aimed at eradicating poverty, suffering, discord, conflicts, disputes and wars. It should be a system in which no country can aspire to hegemony or abuse its influence, a system that supports the peaceful settlement of disputes. It should give all peoples the opportunity to look to the future with optimism. The United Nations remains the most valid forum and the best tool for building a world consensus in this respect. Let us reform and strengthen this Organization so that it will be able to meet these requirements, all of which emanate from its aims and purposes — the establishment of peace and security, and the promotion of economic and social development in the interests of progress, welfare and prosperity for future generations.