Barbados, 1982

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.