As we come to this session of the General
Assembly, the international situation is in some
respects more serious than it has been since the
end of the Second World War and the establishment
of the Organization. The quantity of armaments is
much greater, weapons are more devastating,
hunger more severe, destitution more extensive,
and the curse of unemployment more far- reaching
than ever before since the establishment of the
Organization. We have certainly made some gains
and that we must not forget. But much more
glaring are the cases where success has been
limited, or when no results at all were achieved.
I intend to deal with a few of those aspects here.
283. When I addressed the General Assembly in
September 1981 meeting, I referred to a number
of provisions of the Charter and of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. I compared the
words to the deeds. In the past year there has
been a continual deterioration in these matters
in many parts of the world. Amongst the most
serious events are those in the Middle East and
in Poland, although they are different in nature.
But, regrettably, a number of further examples
could be cited.
284. In his report on the work of the
Organization, the Secretary-General raises a
matter of great concern, namely, the increased
lack of respect for Security Council resolutions.
I endorse whole-heartedly his words of warning
that we are perilously near to international
anarchy. The structure of the Organization, and
in particular the veto, has been both its
strength and its weakness. Changes in that basic
structure could result in the collapse of the
Organization, and therefore I do not regard such
changes as being open to debate. But it is
evident that the ability of the United Nations to
promote the peaceful settlement of disputes is
virtually non-existent when a State with veto
powers perceives its direct or indirect interests
threatened by actions of the Organization. Such
situations occur more and more frequently. In
addition, there is an increasing tendency by
other States to feel that they are strong enough
to defy the unanimous decisions of the Security
Council. They are confident that the unity of
purpose of the Organization is not such that
words will be translated into action. That trend
must be reversed. It cannot be achieved by
amending the Charter of the United Nations but,
rather, as a result of nations becoming
increasingly cognizant of the danger to world
peace if those developments continue.
285. At the recent meeting of the Nordic
Foreign Ministers, the strong support of the
Nordic countries was reaffirmed for the United
Nations and for measures aimed at settling
international disputes by peace-ful means, in
accordance with the principles of the Charter
concerning respect for the territorial integrity
and political independence of all States. In that
context an appeal was made to all States to
respect the internationally accepted rules
guiding relations between States. It was declared
that the Nordic countries would continue to work
to strengthen the United Nations as a universal
organization for peace. Further-more, the
ministers were in agreement on the need to
examine and to discuss with other States measures
which could strengthen the ability of the
Organization to act in conflicts and crises. I
draw attention to those statements of the Nordic
Foreign Ministers and reiterate the appeal
contained therein.
286. The situation in the Middle East has been
discussed in the United Nations from its
inception. But still we seem far from a peaceful
solution of these disputes, which constantly
poison the atmosphere and cause the inhabitants
of the region suffering and death. That tragedy
culminated in the massacre in the refugee camps
in Beirut earlier this month. All those who wish
to uphold respect for the Charter must insist on
an independent investigation of that crime as
soon as possible.
287. The invasion of Lebanon by Israel is one
more episode in a long history of revenge and
retaliation in the Middle East. At the same time,
it is a tragic example of the disrespect for
Security Council deci-sions to which I have
referred. I declare my full support for the
United Nations resolutions condemning the
invasion and occupation of Lebanon by Israel and
its refusal to abide by the Security Council
resolutions.
That behavior increases the difficulty of
attaining a comprehensive, just and lasting
solution of the disputes in this area. Such a
solution must be based on Security Council
resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and must
safeguard the security of all States in the
region, including Israel, and ensure justice for
all peoples, including the Palestinians. In that
connection, I would also emphasize in particular
the necessity for realizing the legitimate
national rights of the Palestinians through the
exercise of their right to self- determination,
including their right to participate in
negotiations on their own future.
288. I welcome the proposals for a solution of
the major problems in the Middle East which have
been put forward by the President of the United
States and the Arab Summit Conference. It is
still too soon to predict whether those proposals
can form a basis for negotiations by all the
parties, but I sincerely hope that they will.
Indeed, many elements of both proposals are
worthy of further consideration.
289. I should like to turn briefly to a number
of other questions, questions which are the most
blatant examples of the disrespect for the
equality, sovereignty and political independence
of all nations. These are principles which should
be respected under the Charter of the United
Nations but which are in fact disregarded in
practice when the more powerful States perceive
their interests to be better served thereby.
290. The situation in Afghanistan has not
improved since we met here one year ago. The
military occupation has now lasted nearly three
years. Efforts continue with limited success to
force the submission of the people and compel
them to resign themselves to the situation.
Repeated United Nations resolutions are
disregarded. Much the same can indeed be said of
war- torn Kampuchea.
291. Just over two years ago, new waves of
freedom spread through Polish society. The people
sought a greater voice in their own affairs.
Agreements were reached with the authorities on a
slight relaxation of controls and the
establishment of free trade unions was allowed.
These tendencies towards freedom were to be
short-lived. They ended with the imposition of
martial law on 13 December 1981.
292. A list of this kind could be long. There
are many States which suffer under
totalitarianism and oppression where the
principles of the Charter are ignored.
293. While such situations recur at short
intervals, it is extremely difficult to lower the
tension in international relations and to
proceed to effective and realistic measures to
promote and preserve peace and security in
accordance with the fundamental aims of the
Organization. Such measures are indeed essential
now.
294. The quantity of armaments is of a much
greater dimension and weapons are more menacing
than those the world has ever seen before; but
still the frantic arms race continues. The debate
on who is the most powerful could no doubt go on
a J in/M/Mm. In fact, the debate would probably
not be resolved unless the unthinkable should
happenóthat the big Powers put the matter to the
test. It is not likely that many would be left to
judge the outcome, and the winner would not be in
a very much more enviable position than the
loser. The weapons of mass destruction can at any
time bring total devastation to mankind. The
nuclear Powers carry a heavy burden. They are,
indeed, responsible for the fate of the world.
295. Mankind has but one option. The only
alternative which would not sooner or later lead
to destruc-tion is effective and genuine
agreements on arms reduction as a first step on
the long road to total disarmament, which should
beóindeed must beóthe vision of those who believe
in the high principles of the Charter.
2%. The demand for realistic action on
disarmament is more pronounced now than it has been
for a long time. In that light, it is tragic to
have to admit that the second special session on
disarmament yielded practically no results. We
must therefore hope and trust that concrete
results will be achieved in the negotiations
between the United State s and the Soviet Union
on reducing stockpiles of a number of the main
types of nuclear weapons, in the negotiations on
mutual and balanced force reductions and in the
work of the Committee on Disarmament and, of
course, at the Madrid Conference on Security and
Co-operation in Europe, should it result in an
agreement on a conference on confidence-building
measures and disarmament in Europe. The
implementation of disarmament must be based on
reciprocity. Anything else would be neither
realistic nor justifiable. The aim should be to
achieve a balanceónot a balance of terror, but a
balance based on a reduction, not an increase, of
arms.
297. As a representative of an island nation
which depends for its existence on the living
resources of the sea, I am bound to express grave
concern about the increased armaments in the
oceans and, in particular, the enlarged fleets of
submarines armed with nuclear weapons. Even in
peacetime, an accident under adverse conditions
could destroy the economic basis of such nations.
Thus I would emphasize that the proper response
to the opposition of people in continental
Europe and America to an even greater increase in
the number of nuclear missiles in their countries
is not to move these weapons to the oceans but,
rather, to agree to a real reduction. Only thus
will the threat posed by such weapons be
diminished.
298. As regards the law of the sea, I would
call on those countries which are still not
prepared to agree to the Convention to reconsider
their position. Through the participation of all
nations in the Convention on the Law of the Sea,
we can avoid severe conflicts between individual
States on various law-of-the-sea issues and thus
take an important step towards the world
structure to which we aspire in the Charter.
299. Earlier, I dealt particularly with States
and their relations with other States and the
lack of respect which is all too often evident in
those relations. It is a fact that it is usually
the individual human being who is the victim in
such circumstances, although in the name of
safeguarding the interests of one State against
another. But it is the responsibility of each
Stateóand indeed an obligation undertaken by all
the States Members of the United Nationsóto
ensure respect for the individual and for human
rights. That obligation is unfortunately not
complied with by a large number of Governments
which here represent the inhabitants of their
countries. This is even true of many Governments
which in other respects abide by their
international obligations.
300. In referring to fundamental human rights,
I include therein the right of every human being
to an equitable share in the world's resources.
Other human rights are of little avail to those
with no prospects but starvation. It must
therefore be one of the principal aims of the
Organization to strive to ensure that every child
bom in this world has sufficient food and health
care and education in accordance with his or her
ability. The mottes of this session of the
General Assembly might, indeed, be decreased
hunger, lower military expenditures and increased
respect for international obligations.