Mr. President, I wish to add my congratulations to those which have
already been expressed on your election to the presidency of the
thirty seventh session of the General Assembly. I also wish to
express my appreciation to the outgoing President, Mr. Kittani. It
fell to him to preside over the Assembly at a time when it had to
grapple with critical issues that threatened and indeed seriously
ruptured international peace and security. Those sessions were
unquestionably taxing, but as an accomplished and experienced
diplomat he always rose to the occasion. We must take this
opportunity to pay a tribute to the Secretary General. This is the
first regular session of the General Assembly that commences with Mr.
Perez de Cuellar at the head of the Organization, His first year of
office has been a most distressing one in international relations and
yet he has been able to rise above last year's crises and to focus in
his report on the work of the Organization on the fundamental issues
that must be addressed by this world body. In his report he quite
rightly identifies the central problem facing the Organization as its
capacity to keep the peace and serve as a forum for negotiations. He
pleaded for a conscious recommitment by Governments to the Charter.
My country concurs with the Secretary General's views. I wish to
express the hope that we can, in our deliberations over the next
three months, find effective solutions to the difficulties that he
has identified. We wish him well as he guides this Organization. In
my address to the Assembly at the thirty sixth session I stated that
the decade of the 1980s was probably the most dangerous, certainly
the most critical, since the Second World War. I noted then that the
world economy was in crisis and that inflation in all countries, rich
and poor alike, was out of control. I regret to say that the
situation has not improved. Indeed the current international economic
recession is deep and pervasive. All countries, industrialized and
developing, oil producing and non oil producing, are currently in a
state of economic decline, with not a few on the brink of collapse.
The economic backdrop against which international relations are being
conducted continues to be characterized by recession, restrictive
trade policies and high interest rates in the industrialized
countries. Weakening demand for their primary products and low
commodity prices have depressed the export earnings of developing
countries. Increasing debt burdens have contributed to their economic
difficulties. The policies so far applied have not been able to avert
high levels of unemployment, widespread starvation and persistent
poverty in much of the developing world. I share the view of those
who are persuaded that recovery of the international economy is
unlikely to be accomplished or to be lasting unless the developing
countries as a group can return to a period of positive growth and
prosperity. Increasingly, it is being emphasized that there is a
parallel between the present world economic situation and the
recession of the 1930s, but I believe that there is a fundamental
difference: there is today a greater understanding of the workings of
the international economic system and of the need for economic
cooperation. In short, narrow national interests may be attractive,
but there is an overwhelming need for all of us to cooperate in order
to save the world economy from further deterioration. What is needed
now is international agreement on ways to stem the tide of growing
protectionism. While protectionist tendencies are predictable in
today's harsh economic climate, we all know from the lessons of
history and the reality of economic interdependence that, if
unchecked, protectionism is at best self defeating and at worst could
precipitate the very international collapse we all seek to avoid.
There is also a need for international agreement on the rate of
creation of new debt and on the role of private institutions,
financial and otherwise, in the recovery effort. We now know that the
world can never again revert to economic self management, to
protectionism and to stalemate in multilateral efforts at financial
and development cooperation without giving rise to the danger of
international economic collapse. Though it is recognized that the
problems with which we are grappling are common to many developing
countries, I should like here to draw special attention to the
particular problems which confront very small States such as those of
my sub region. A month ago the Prime Minister of Barbados addressed
the joint annual meeting of the International Monetary Fund and the
World Bank in Toronto. Speaking on behalf of the member Governments
of the Caribbean Community, he pointed to the fact that the relative
deficiency in resources and capability implicit in small size imposes
greater difficulties on those States in achieving greater self
reliance. He stated that the need for concessional resources in so
called middle income countries cannot be determined by per capita
gross national product alone without giving consideration to the
resource endowments and the institutional capabilities within those
countries. He also expressed concern about the threatened application
of principles based on the new concept of maturation or graduation.
That concept would imply the creation of a permanent class of middle
developed countries which would never realize their full potential by
achieving developed status. It is a matter of deep concern that the
problems facing the economies of very small States are apparently
still not well understood by those who provide bilateral and
multilateral assistance. In this connection, we should like to draw
the Assembly's attention to eminent thinkers in this field. On 8 July
this year, Mr. William Demas, President of the Caribbean Development
Bank, addressed the Economic and Social Council in his capacity as
Chairman of the Committee for Development Planning. He pointed out a
number of steps necessary for the recovery of the world economy and
recommended a more imaginative use of multilateral financial
institutions. Specifically, he called for the following: first, the
immediate restoration of the resources of the International
Development Association to previously agreed levels and their
subsequent enlargement, accompanied by a substantial increase in the
resources of multilateral development institutions, particularly the
World Bank, as well as the creation of an energy facility with a
voluntarily subscribed equity base; secondly, the immediate
resumption of Special Drawing Rights creation and the enlargement of
the resources available to IMF. In addition, IMF should make a
greater proportion of its resources available to the developing
countries on easier terms and should consult and listen to member
States when setting the terms of loans; thirdly, a significant
increase in concessional development assistance, including food aid.
Barbados supports those recommendations and is convinced that they
feature in attempt to deal realistically with the economic problems
facing the developing countries. We are also convinced that the
United Nations has a vital role to play in the realization of the
goals of development. That role may sometimes be limited merely to
sensitizing public opinion, but it is important. I come now to the
proposed global negotiations on international economic cooperation
for development. Barbados is keenly concerned about progress towards
a new international economic order. It is that concern which leads us
to feel a deep sense of disappointment over the failure of efforts to
open global negotiations, for which the 1981 International Meeting on
Cooperation and Development at Cancun held out so much promise. We in
Barbados think it is deplorable that the search for a solution to the
fundamental economic problems of this world should be hampered by
lack of action on the part of the industrialized countries. It is
even sadder when one realizes that in obstructing global
negotiations, those countries are frustrating endeavors to combat
hunger and poverty two problems that are endemic to most of the third
world and are the natural consequences of the old, unjust order. I
believe that the serious obstacles to the efficient utilization of
human and material resources for development are a result of the
current state of international economic relations. The present
economic order must be replaced by one based on equity, sovereign
equality, common interests and cooperation. Developing countries, and
even some developed ones, have expressed a desire to see the present
system replaced. My country would like to see the entire
international community summon the necessary political will to cure
the economic ills which plague all our countries. I believe that I am
on safe ground when I assert that Barbados is not alone among
developing countries in regarding the activities of the Organization
in the sphere of technical assistance as one of the more satisfactory
aspects of its work. UNDP has, without a doubt, established itself
over the years as one of the most effective means for delivering
technical assistance throughout the developing world. And yet, at the
meeting of the Governing Council in June of this year, the
Administrator of the Programme produced statistical information
showing that the Programme is in grave danger as a result of the
declining level of its real resources. The record will show that my
country, upon which the hardships of the worldwide economic recession
press no less onerously than upon any other country, has not faltered
in its financial support for the Programme. The reason for this
continued support is that Barbados views the state of
underdevelopment as one from which all countries of the world must
emerge. If countries mean what they say when they lament the colossal
waste resulting from ever increasing expenditure on weapons of
destruction, let them without delay look to those remedies which lie
nearest to hand. UNDP is one such remedy, and it deserves the support
of countries seeking to achieve the kind of world which we all
desire. That leads me to express my country's disappointment at
further evidence of the lack of concern by some countries for
development initiatives. I refer to the failure of those countries to
support the Convention on the Law of the Sea. Barbados participated
in the long and tortuous negotiations directed towards solving the
problem of the management of the resources of the sea. We expected
that the principle of the common heritage of mankind would be
accepted and applied. Consequently, we are saddened by the grudging
reluctance with which many of the developed States have recognized
the. Convention. We are also distressed by the apparently firm
intention of stronger maritime Powers to ensure that the most
promising aspects of the Convention are stymied by the concerted
action of the technologically advanced. It would be worse than folly
to repeat the mistakes of the last century, when colonizing Powers
carved up vast continental tracts of land. We live today with the
legacy of those nineteenth century errors. To allow the vast expanse
of the oceans and their resources to be disposed of only among the
mighty however bland the contemporary approach would be to fail
succeeding generations. Barbados will therefore cooperate with
likeminded nations in the establishment of an effective and efficient
International Sea bed Authority. Such an Authority has the potential
of being a vital agency for the management of and equitable
participation in the wealth of the oceans. It therefore deserves the
active support of all those who recognize the right of
technologically disadvantaged countries to have a fair share of the
resources of our planet. We also welcome the decision of the Third
United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea to have the Final Act
and Convention signed in Jamaica later this year. This is most
fitting, for although the political center of gravity has shifted to
other areas, the Caribbean is an area of historical importance,
having been a trading center in former centuries. The signing of that
multifaceted Convention will have particular significance. On that day
we shall reaffirm and strengthen our commitment to a more equitable
sharing of the riches of the oceans. We shall, also be pledging
ourselves to preserve and develop their living and nonliving
resources as part of the patrimony of all peoples. Just as the
international community has failed to deal successfully with the
inequities of the world economy, it has also been unsuccessful with
the question of disarmament. We are all aware that the failure of the
Assembly at the recent special session to agree on a comprehensive
programme for disarmament has caused grave disappointment. The
discussions were important in so far as they provided an opportunity
for all countries to focus collectively on the general disarmament
process and its objectives. I do not wish to reiterate here the
horrifying statistics of world expenditure on arms, for, in the words
of the report of the Independent Commission on Disarmament and
Security Issues, under the chairmanship of Olaf Palme, now Sweden's
head of Government, they have assumed a sort of deadening
familiarity. Effective resolution of the disarmament issue depends
primarily on East West negotiations and on the political action of
the super Powers. However, all countries, large and small, must lend
their voices in support of early action. It is in the common interest
of all of us to avoid war. Barbados is convinced that the level of
armaments will not be reduced unless hard negotiations are concluded
between the super Powers and agreement reached on a mutual and
balanced force reduction. We hope that universal awareness of the
potentially devastating consequences of the arms race will encourage
efforts to bring about effective and conclusive negotiations on this
issue Barbados will continue to share the related concerns of the
international community on matters of security and development. If
the resources released from a cutback in the arms industry were used
for social and economic development, then widespread unemployment,
hunger and poverty could be abated. But this can be achieved only if
nations are convinced that they are serving a greater good than their
own narrow interests. Barbados therefore again calls on all nations
to respect the institutions they have built and to honor the
undertakings they have made. Barbados speaks out again, firm in the
conviction that the United Nations and the Charter are the guardians
of international morality and the rule of law. Since the last regular
session of the General Assembly, recourse has too often been made to
the use of arms to resolve conflicts between States. This trend must
be condemned. My delegation once more would like to call on all
nations to utilize the peaceful means for the settlement of disputes
which are spelled out in Article 33 of the Charter. This leads me to
the question of the Security Council. The Charter intended that that
Council should have primary responsibility for international peace
and security. However, far too often, as the Secretary General warns
in his report, nations have avoided bringing critical problems to the
attention of the Council, or on occasion have submitted them too late
for that body to exercise any serious influence on their development
and outcome. All members of the Council, both permanent and non
permanent, have a duty to examine dispassionately and to search
diligently for solutions to issues that are brought before the
Council. It is regrettable that the decisions of the Council are far
too frequently ignored. I believe that the legal obligation of States
to adhere to resolutions and decisions of the Council would be
reinforced by the moral authority of a Council that is seen to be
impartial. It is only when the States Members of the United Nations
carry out the decisions of the Security Council that that body will
fulfil the role for which it was conceived. My Government is mindful
of the efforts that the Security Council has made over the years to
bring peace to the Middle East. Yet today more than ever before the
continuing unstable situation there, vividly dramatized by the events
in Lebanon during the past two months, threatens global peace and
security. My Government believes that the withdrawal of all foreign
troops from Lebanon is a necessary condition for the restoration of
peace in that country. The people of Lebanon must be given a chance
to seek for themselves a genuine and lasting solution to their
problems. Barbados is horrified by the recent massacre of'
Palestinian refugees in Beirut. We condemn in the most unequivocal
terms the perpetrators of that dastardly slaughter of innocent men,
women and children in refugee camps. It is indeed an irony of history
that the tragedy of Sabra and Shatila might have been prevented by
those who were themselves victims of past atrocities. We note that
that barbarous act has significantly alienated support from Israel,
whose soldiers were in effective control and occupation of the area
where the camps were situated. This tragedy emphasizes the urgent
need for more earnest efforts to be made towards a general and
lasting peace in that region. In the meantime, the Government of
Barbados wishes to endorse calls made by the international community
for an investigation into the barbarities in Beirut. Barbados
recognizes the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self
determination; and their latest sufferings underline the poignant
need for them to have their own homeland. We also recognize and
support the right of Israel to exist as a sovereign and independent
State within agreed and recognized boundaries. But Barbados has
always been opposed to the use of force to settle international
disputes. We believe that acts of aggression in the Middle East will
not enhance the chances for a lasting peace in that region. A number
of elements now exist in the form of the Israeli Egyptian peace
treaty, the plan of the Twelfth Arab Summit Conference and the
proposals of the United States Administration, along with Security
Council resolutions 242 and 338, which could be used to build a
permanent and lasting peace in the Middle East. Included in the
perennial litany of woe is the yet unresolved question of Namibia.
The freedom that has come to Angola, Mozambique and Zimbabwe will, it
is hoped, soon come to Namibia. The writing has long been on the wall
for the racist regime in Pretoria, but its obduracy persists. In
desperation it continues to procrastinate by attempting to make Cuban
disengagement from Angola a condition of Namibian independence. South
Africa has no right whatsoever in Namibia, and should leave
forthwith. A word about apartheid and sports an issue which, because
of the prowess of Caribbean nations in many sporting activities,
principally the game of cricket, is of more than passing interest to
my country. The proponents of apartheid have no shame. They do,
however, have an abundance of material resources. By assuming that
each man has his price, they have been seeking by wealth and stealth
to lure our black sportsmen to parade their skills in South Africa.
The South African authorities hope thereby to strangle our sport
internationally and to reduce our positions of principle on apartheid
to entry. For countries such as the one I have the honor to
represent, countries which flinch at tampering with personal
freedoms, persuasion in matters of personal conduct and conscience is
preferable to coercion. None the less, our cricketers must know that
playing in South Africa will disqualify them for selection for our
national team. Today I join with those solemnizing the Day of
Solidarity with South African Political Prisoners in pressing for the
release of Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners in South
Africa. We hope that representatives here will continue to use every
method at their command to isolate South Africa politically, socially
and economically. That small States are vulnerable is a truism for
which ample evidence can be found in recent events, both in the
Indian and Atlantic Oceans an in the Caribbean Sea. It is to the
credit of organizations such as this that many more small island
States have not fallen prey to the desires of somearrogant, rapacious
and stronger neighboring State. We must none the less be constantly
vigilant. Today, many small island States face the threat of attack,
not by neighboring nations but by mercenaries soldiers of fortune,
motivated by personal greed, spurred by racial intolerance, or
prompted by some nation State which would fain do its own dirty work,
but dare not. We contend that the activities of mercenaries violate
international law and constitute interference in the internal affairs
of other States. The activities of mercenaries result in breaches of
territorial integrity, national sovereignty and independence and
violate the self determination of peoples. Such activities pose a
serious danger to international peace and security. Barbados is, and
will continue to be, in the vanguard of those States which press for
the adoption of resolutions and conventions to stamp out the
recruitment, use, financing and training of mercenaries. I wish,
therefore, to appeal to Member States for whom the elaboration of
such a Convention would appear to create problems to present their
case in a constructive manner so that solutions may be attempted.
Finally, let me assure the Assembly that Barbados holds the view that
the Organization presents the best means for harmonizing the actions
of nations in the attainment of common ends. It already has many
impressive achievements to its credit. However, it must now address
other pressing needs that clamor for solution. We fully realize that
the transformation of resolutions, decisions and treaties into
practical action cannot be achieved except by commitment and
dedicated effort by all our countries. Intellectual and moral
thinking in the twentieth century has taken a huge humanitarian leap.
We have come to accept that peace in our time means more than the
mere cessation of war. It connotes the creation and maintenance of
conditions conducive to the full development of man's physical,
intellectual and spiritual attributes. These conditions cannot exist
if the leading military Powers continue in their race to outdo each
other in the stockpiling and trading of arms of frighteningly
destructive power. Nor can the conditions indispensable to true peace
exist where the battlefield is the ready recourse for disputing
nations. Nor will the conditions of true peace exist while the
millions of the North are blessed with plenty, while dehumanizing
poverty and crippling underdevelopment plague the millions of the
South. Nor will the conditions of true peace ever exist until the
miasma of apartheid is eradicated from southern Africa. These
conditions will not exist and be secure until, in word as well as in
deed, we begin to live out the true meaning of the resonant exordium
of the Charter of this great Organization. There it reaffirms the
faith of the founding nations and indeed of all mankind in
fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the person, in
the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small.