Syria

It gives me great pleasure to congratulate Mr. Gurirab on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its fifty-fourth session. I am confident that the struggle for freedom of his friendly country, Namibia, and his wide-ranging knowledge of international issues will facilitate his lofty task and will lead the deliberations of the Assembly at this important session to a successful conclusion. I should like to express my thanks to the Foreign Minister of Uruguay for his efforts and wise leadership of our deliberations in the General Assembly during the previous session. I should also like to express our gratitude to the Secretary-General of our Organization, Mr. Kofi Annan, for his attempts to uphold the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations. The Syrian Arab Republic welcomes the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga to the United Nations. We are confident that the presence of these States in the international community will buttress the role of the United Nations and uphold its principles. 15 Leaving the last century of the second millennium and entering the first century of the third millennium does not in itself mean the end of an era and the beginning of a new one in the life of humankind. States and peoples will take with them into the next century their concerns, aspirations, successes, failures, challenges and hopes. They will continue as usual to follow their economic, educational, political and social development plans and programmes, knowing that the end of the twentieth century will not automatically mean an end to current regional conflicts. Neither will it automatically raise levels of development or rid developing countries of the debt burdens under which they are languishing. If the advocates of market theories and globalization, and their political leaders, were to recognize that at present the poor are becoming poorer while the rich become richer and that the gap between developing and developed countries is becoming wider in every area — whether in the economic, commercial, technical, health or environmental spheres — an element of pessimism would, unfortunately, mar the feeling of optimism with which we hope to welcome the dawn of the twenty-first century. Optimism about the future is desirable because it prevents humanity, both at individual and society levels, from falling into the trap of despair and frustration. Optimism is also justified because progress in research, science and knowledge shrinks distances, eliminates obstacles and opens doors and minds in the South as well as in the North. Given that fact, it is natural that people's understanding of each other's problems and concerns should increase and that ultimately a common awareness will develop to enable everyone to face the threats and challenges that await humankind everywhere on this planet. Like poisonous waste from industrial development, the epidemics resulting from underdevelopment and poverty know no borders or obstacles. Drugs would not have spread in some States in the South had it not been for the many traffickers and users in the countries of the North. Neither should we forget that the pollution of the environment in the countries of the North is primarily the result of industrial production of all kinds, both sophisticated and basic, at a time when environmental pollution in the countries of the South is primarily the result of the lack of a minimum of small, basic industries capable of making products to deal with environmental pollution or of employing the means to do so. In this context, we should like to reaffirm our belief that weakening the economies of the developing countries does not necessarily serve the interests of the economies of developed countries, because it weakens the purchasing power of the former, which, in turn, negatively affects the rates of economic development of the latter. The financial crisis that affected the economies of the countries of South-East Asia two years ago reflected that mutual effect when its repercussions reached Brazil and even some other countries in South America. There must, therefore, be a constructive dialogue between developing and developed countries, a dialogue based on common interests, genuine interrelations and mutual responsibilities aimed at ensuring sustainable development and social justice. We hope that there will be an end to the contrariety by which the industrial countries demand that developing countries open their markets and borders to their products while the developing countries are finding it difficult to export their goods because of protectionist measures and obstacles, including the prevention of the transfer of technology and the refusal to allow developing countries to integrate such technology into their industrial processes. If we were to look back at the ethnic and religious wars and conflicts that spread with the end of the cold war and that reached the heart of Africa, Asia and even Europe, we would find it difficult to imagine their repercussions being confined within closed borders. Through succeeding waves of migration, various religions and ethnic groups have become part of the social fabric of most societies in the world, especially in Western countries. The tragedy of such wars and conflicts is therefore a source of concern for most countries of the world, particularly the United States of America, which has the largest number of ethnic and religious groups of any country in recent history. That fact explains the interest the United States takes in regional conflicts, particularly those in the Middle East, which have repercussions at the domestic level in the United States. Such American interest is commensurate with the varied impact of these conflicts, although one should not disregard the other economic and strategic interests. The impact of impressive scientific and technological advances in communications and in the flow of information on such events will not be limited to a momentary pinprick of conscience when we see them on our television screens. It could well go beyond this in the future, resulting in concrete action by large groups and 16 could in turn threaten the stability and sovereignty of States, especially those whose populations encompass many ethnic groups and religions. It is regrettable that these grave challenges and phenomena will be carried over into the next century, perhaps for years or even decades, without a remedy. We are convinced that the best framework for facing up to these challenges and phenomena in a serious and effective manner is a United Nations truly respected by all its Member States, one based on collective action by the States of the North and of the South, all according to their own potential and capacities. Marginalizing the role of the United Nations, using it only on selected occasions and as a cover for initiatives and decisions adopted outside the Security Council, will serve the interests of no one. The problems and challenges facing mankind are truly grave and dangerous both quantitatively and qualitatively. We believe that no one State, however powerful and wise it is, can meet these universal problems and challenges alone, much less find lasting, solid solutions to them. Clearly, many are dissatisfied with the use of humanitarian pretexts to launch military intervention outside the framework of the Security Council. It began with the intervention in Somalia in 1992, whose repercussions included the collapse of all State institutions and the carving up of the capital, Mogadishu, among fighting warlords. This trend continued with the intervention in Kosovo, where the fate of the people remains in the balance, although the intervention succeeded in supplying the people with medicine and food. But here it must be said that illegitimate intervention outside the framework of the Security Council is not as bad as completely ignoring dangerous and bloody crises such as those beyond what might be called the line of death and hunger: a line stretching from the Horn of Africa, in the east, to Angola, in the west, and then to Rwanda, Burundi and the Congo. Many suffering Africans who live along this bleeding line and who lack the most basic necessities may well envy the inhabitants of Kosovo, who at least had food and medicine during their ordeal. Since the end of the cold war hopes have been pinned on the reform of the United Nations and on an increase in the membership of the Security Council with a view to achieving a more democratic and fairer representation in this international organization. The Non-Aligned Movement has been enthusiastic about this issue and has given it serious consideration at all its conferences. Its member States know full well that they lack influence in the Security Council commensurate with their numbers and reflecting their legitimate concerns. At the same time, Germany and Japan, following major international transformations, have become aware of how important it is for them to become permanent members of the Security Council. Here Italy has played an important role in seeking a third way between the North and the South. No solution has yet emerged that could attract consensus on the subject among members of the United Nations. The unavoidable question for us all is what has so far been achieved in the process of reforming the Security Council and promoting its role and status. The answer is nothing, except for the marginalization of the role and status of the Security Council and the extension of its activities beyond the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, both when events have required it and, at times, when they have not. It seems that the premeditated marginalization of the role of the Security Council and the fact that the reform process has been almost dormant are being used by some as a pretext for ignoring the Charter and violating the sovereignty of States through the use of regional military organizations as a substitute for the Security Council. The world today cannot endure a nuclear arms race that threatens the security and the very survival of mankind, particularly in the absence of a just and stable international order. There will be no successful non- proliferation regime without achieving universality for the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Syria, the other Arab States and most countries of the world have appealed to the five nuclear States, in the light of the 1995 extension of the NPT, not to exclude any State from acceding to the Treaty, so that the world may be spared another nuclear arms race. A new nuclear arms race has actually taken place in South Asia since the extension of the Treaty. In the Middle East, Israel remains the only State in the region that refuses to accede to the Treaty and to submit all its nuclear installations to the safeguards system of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). As the time for the next review of the NPT approaches, Syria renews its call for transforming the Middle East into a nuclear-weapon-free zone under United Nations auspices, as a serious contribution to the creation of a propitious climate for the regional peace, security and stability to which we all aspire. The international community looked to the peace process that began at Madrid in 1991 as the most 17 important, most serious initiative for ending a conflict that has been raging for decades, one that has bled the huge economic and human energies of the peoples of the region. The Madrid framework, the guarantees offered by the United States, the results reached based on relevant Security Council resolutions, the principle of land for peace, all constituted obligations and commitments accepted by all parties concerned. None of these can now be called into question or circumvented. They all have been duly deposited with the United States Administration, with the agreement of the parties concerned. Hence Syria's call to reaffirm that trust, including complete Israeli withdrawal to the lines of 4 June 1967, and resumption of peace talks with Israel from the point at which they were suspended in order to address pending matters until both sides agree on full peace. What Syria is calling for cannot be considered a “precondition”, as the Israeli government claims: if we were to accept that it was, as the Netanyahu Government also claimed, we would have to conclude that any agreement between negotiators on any single component of any a peace accord would always be considered a “precondition” if any move were made to conclude any other component of a peace accord. And that would invariably take negotiations, back to square one after each step forward, endlessly back and forth. Also, we draw the Assembly's attention to the falsity of the Israeli claim that Syria wants to get a particular result in the negotiations before they have even started. Needless to say, trust in the United States of America does not, by itself, constitute a peace agreement; rather, it is a fundamental part of an agreement whose remaining elements — normal, peaceful relations and security arrangements based on the purposes and principles laid down under United States auspices and with its participation — still need to be fleshed out. So we were not surprised, yesterday, by the address of the Foreign Minister of Israel before this Assembly, when — under the flag of peace education — he requested leaders and teachers to stress to their peoples and students the importance of peace, totally ignoring the fact that the Israeli occupation is a major reason for the absence of peace in the region. Peace education requires first and foremost an end to Israel's occupation of Arab territories. Specifically, it must withdraw from the Golan Heights to the 4 June 1967 line; from south Lebanon; from the western Bekaa, and also from Jerusalem, the city of peace. Settlement activities in the occupied territories and the destruction of Arab houses must stop. Last but not least, Israeli words about peace must be translated into deeds, so that students in Israel do not think that peace education means continued occupation by force of other peoples' lands. During the past few weeks, major efforts have been made by the United States of America, and by the European Union, the Russian Federation and other countries. We hope that these efforts will continue until Israel realizes how fair Syria's position is and how ready Syria is to resume negotiations at the point where they left off. Let us not waste long and arduous years of negotiations: Syria is eager not to miss this opportunity to achieve peace; if it is missed, then Israel alone should take the blame. Syria reaffirms once more its great concern for the unity and territorial integrity of Iraq and calls for an end to the suffering of the fraternal Iraqi people. It calls for economic sanctions to be lifted, in accordance with the relevant Security Council resolutions. It also calls for no action or measure to be taken outside the United Nations context. At the same time, we ask Iraq to implement the remaining Security Council resolutions in a manner that guarantees a just solution to the problem of Kuwaiti prisoners of war and other detainees. Syria also calls on the Security Council to put an immediate and final end to the sanctions against Libya, as Libya has honoured all its obligations under Security Council resolutions. We would emphasize that we fully support the Libyan requests for the sanctions to be ended. In the light of the fraternal relations which Syria maintains with the United Arab Emirates and the Islamic Republic of Iran, we call on these two neighbouring countries to hold talks to find a peaceful solution to the dispute over three islands in the Gulf. The continuing tragic situation in Afghanistan is a source of great concern to us. We are convinced that the Afghan problem can be solved only if the fighting ceases and negotiations are begun on achieving national reconciliation and finding an acceptable and lasting political settlement that results in security and stability for our friends the Afghan people. Syria expresses its full support for all measures to ensure peace, security and stability on the Korean peninsula. It expresses its support also for the aspirations of the Korean people for national unity achieved by peaceful means and free of foreign intervention. 18 Syria once again highlights the need to take all necessary steps, at the earliest possible moment, to end the economic, trade and financial embargo on Cuba imposed by the United States of America for almost four decades. We support Cuba's call for differences between the two countries to be resolved through dialogue and on a basis of equality, mutual respect and good- neighbourly relations. As we bid farewell to the twentieth century, the human race is still yearning for a world free of war, injustice, ignorance and poverty, a world governed by international relations based on cooperation, mutual respect, greater justice and true equity. Those are the yearnings which the peoples of the world hope to see realized next century, so that coming generations are guaranteed a better life and a more prosperous and humane future.