Cape Verde, 1999

Mr. President, it gives me

great pleasure to convey to you and your country, Namibia,

my heartfelt congratulations on your election to the

presidency of the General Assembly for this session. We

are fully confident that your ability, well-known experience

and personal talent will crown our work with success, to

which the delegation of Cape Verde will contribute its

greatest efforts.

We would like to express our appreciation and

gratitude to your predecessor, Mr. Didier Opertti of

Uruguay, for the professionalism and devotion with which

he conducted the work of the Assembly at its fifty-third

session. We would also like to say that, at a time when the

international community must confront complex challenges,

it is a great privilege for the United Nations to be able to

rely on the creativity, dynamism and determination that the

Secretary-General brings to his lofty office.

We are pleased to welcome the Republics of Kiribati

and Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga as new members in

our Organization.

The annual session of the General Assembly which

opened a few days ago will lead us into the next

millennium; during the session, preparations will be made

for various important events planned for the year 2000,

including the special sessions of the General Assembly on

the implementation of the outcome of the World Summit

for Social Development and Further Initiatives and the

Fourth World Conference on Women.

The fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly will

also prepare for a major event, the millennium summit.

Therefore, this will be a time when we will need to

demonstrate not only our most lucid thinking, but also and

perhaps primarily a firm will to act. The core of our

discussions will be the great challenges that humanity faces

today and will face in the foreseeable future, and we will

need to identify what must be done to meet them

successfully. In that regard, clarification of the role which

the United Nations must play and specific ways for it to

attain this goal must be a priority of the summit agenda.

We are at the end of a decade marked by a new phase

in international affairs, a decade, however, that was one of

unmet expectations when we think back to how high they

were at its beginning. The experience of the past few years

has been one of continuous increase in the complexity and

frequency of emerging situations leading to a veritable

overhaul of concepts and perceptions. But we are not sure

that we are any closer to the major solutions we lack. It

might even be said that we have embarked on a process

that has its own logic and momentum and in which the

attainment of common aspirations does not always seem

to be the driving force. Yet today, and not only today, we

have at our disposal sufficient intellectual and material

resources to build a successful future. It is therefore

disquieting to have to acknowledge that, despite all this

potential, humankind is still incapable of controlling its

own destiny. Acquiring this ability is an imperative,

therefore, and must be the fundamental goal of our

debates at the dawn of the new millennium.

Given that the destiny of humankind is a collective

challenge, control over it must be sought collectively for

it to be meaningful. The effective implementation of the

concept of “international community”, which has been the

basis of our political philosophy for a long time now, can

no longer be avoided or postponed as it has been so far.

When the millennium summit meets a year from

now, the leaders of the world must be prepared to start

rebuilding an international community and usher in a new

era in which sustainable human development will become

a real right for all peoples; in which international justice

will be more effective; and in which the United Nations

Charter will no longer be applied in a manner that bends

with the wind.

Democracy as a means of ordering and managing

societies has seen important progress during this decade.

In its most visible aspects, such as the selection of leaders

through pluralistic, more transparent processes, it is

based on an understanding that governance by elected

officials can and should bring peace, prosperity and

justice to a society and that elected leaders are politically

accountable for the results obtained.

As we all know, these assumptions are not absolute

and are becoming even less so. When looking at

governments individually, it is apparent that command

and control of important factors which determine the

well-being of citizens are sorely lacking. Meeting the

necessary conditions for each State to succeed depends to

a large extent on multilateral concertation and

cooperation. This dialogue between States, however, will

not be enough to resolve all the points at issue, which are

increasingly in the hands of third parties.

Today, therefore, there is a growing gap between

social responsibility — which remains limited to the

public and the political domains — and the availability

10

of the wherewithal and will to act on which this

responsibility is based. However the situation evolves,

adjustment must be ensured through revitalization of this

same concept of “international community” to which I

referred. Once again, this concept proves to be the

cornerstone of the quest for a harmonious and prosperous

destiny for humankind.

The progress to which we aspire will always coexist

with differences and even inequality. Of that we are well

aware. But the shocking magnitude of poverty today must

provoke a gut feeling of rejection that makes it imperative

for this situation to be remedied at any cost. The palliative

measures that we seek to introduce and maintain should not

lull us and cannot take the place of definitive solutions. It

is imperative that poverty should no longer be seen as an

acceptable or inevitable by-product of the economic and

social process: rather, we should come to see it as a serious

breakdown in it that must be attacked and corrected. Even

in societies considered to be well off, poverty victimizes

certain segments of the population that lack even the

minimum material conditions to live in dignity. The least-

developed countries are even less able to roll back poverty

in any meaningful way.

Speaking of poverty necessarily prompts a discussion

of the situation in Africa, where the greatest number of

least-developed countries are found. We have said

before — and this does not detract from Africa's own,

inherent responsibility — that the way Africa has been left

out of development is also a failure of the international

system. Africa's development difficulties have often been

aggravated by conflicts, but we cannot just wait for peace

to happen there or be discouraged by the current situation.

Finally, while conflicts in Africa have many causes,

economic underdevelopment has been recognized as an

important factor. It is therefore regrettable to witness the

reduction in development assistance in Africa; this has a

direct negative impact on the living conditions of its

peoples, including a decline in health standards, the

dooming to failure of adequate education prospects and a

slowdown in provision of the necessary African

infrastructure. The impact has been worsened by the

decrease in official development assistance to small island

developing States, some of which — in apparent

contradiction to their particular structural constraints — are

showing relatively acceptable human development

indicators and higher gross national product per head

indicators than those found at the bottom of the world

scale. That, together with the good performance of these

countries, has often been used to justify a precipitous and

disastrous reduction in official development assistance.

We would not claim that our countries should be

spared from changing and improving in order to mobilize

and rechannel resources towards these areas and many

others that I have mentioned. I would, however, stress

that this reduction in assistance, due to a certain “fatigue”

that sometimes takes on the appearance of a form of

punishment, cannot solve anything. Rather, development

assistance policy should continue to seek means of

combating and eliminating wasteful activities and

guarantee an effective channelling of resources towards

activities that are necessary to development.

Of course, we agree that official development

assistance is not the key to prosperity. But, added to

vigorous strides with regard to debt to ease the current

financial stranglehold, it facilitates the creation of

favourable human and material conditions for direct

investment, competitiveness, fruitful trade and Africa’s

lasting integration into the world economy.

This reference to Africa’s external debt is not mere

rhetoric. While welcoming recent steps taken and

announced by countries and groups of creditors that have

a particular solidarity with Africa, I must say that this

question has for too long been dealt with too

ungenerously, too late and too slowly. Today’s steps,

limited in content and in the range of countries concerned,

and with overly restrictive eligibility conditions, would

have had much more impact if they had been taken when

they were so urgently demanded a long time ago.

Moreover, they would have facilitated the continuation

and necessary deepening of the economic and political

reforms under way on the African continent, and would

have stimulated increased African regional cooperation.

After 24 years of illegal occupation and extreme

suffering inflicted on the people of East Timor, the

process of self-determination appeared to be leading to an

honourable conclusion for all interested parties. But with

great dismay and indignation we witnessed violent events

in the Territory in recent weeks. These vile acts,

perpetrated by people determined to reverse the choice of

independence that the Timorese clearly expressed at the

ballot box, could and should have been prevented, and

they should receive the total rejection and most vigorous,

effective condemnation of the international community.

Since the illegal occupation and annexation of East

Timor by Indonesia, Cape Verde always strongly

defended the cause of the Timorese people and always

fought for the retention of the problem of East Timor on

the Assembly's agenda. We reaffirm our tireless support for

East Timor’s independence and for the territorial integrity

of this fraternal country, and we call upon the United

Nations to act with all necessary firmness to promote and

guarantee the full implementation of the New York

agreements, in particular the provisions of Security Council

resolution 1264 (1999).

We therefore welcome the arrival of the International

Force in East Timor (INTERFET) and strongly support any

necessary measures it might take to carry out its mission of

restoring order and security; protecting the Timorese people

from coercion, intimidation, violence and terrorism; and

guaranteeing a peaceful transition towards independence.

However, our pleasure at the effective quick reaction

by the international community as a result of the pressure

of worldwide public opinion should not allow us to forget

the thousands of Timorese suffering great shortages and

brutal violations of their most elementary human rights, or

the men, women and children persecuted and forcibly

deported to West Timor and elsewhere in Indonesia simply

because they freely exercised the right of a people to self-

determination under the aegis of the United Nations. It

follows that the international community has a moral and

legal duty to give them immediate, sufficient humanitarian

assistance; to promote and guarantee the return of all

Timorese refugees and deported persons, with dignity and

security; to bring to international justice all those morally

and physically responsible for crimes against humanity and

gross violations of the most fundamental human rights,

committed in East Timor in a planned, systematic way; and

to provide substantial, effective support for the

reconstruction of a country which has suffered from

criminal, premeditated destruction.

In Angola, unfortunately, hostilities have resumed and

the prospects for the implementation of the Lusaka Protocol

have vanished, despite United Nations intervention, which,

it must be acknowledged, has not been successful. The

clear inability of the international community to secure

strict compliance by all the parties and States concerned

with the commitments that they undertook under

agreements negotiated under the aegis of the United

Nations, including resolutions of its own bodies, has led to

the re-emergence of this conflict. That is because it has not

prevented UNITA from seriously rearming and impeding

the extension of State administration to the whole of

Angola's territory.

The magnitude of the long and bloody conflict in

Angola should be a source of great concern to the

international community, which should continue and

intensify its efforts to identify possible ways of restoring

peace to Angola, efforts that should be deployed by all

the entities that can contribute. Cape Verde will not fail

to participate to the extent that its resources allow.

One priority must be to bring together everything

needed to deal with the unprecedented humanitarian

catastrophe hitting Angola. The need is great and urgent.

Everything possible should be done to provide immediate

and adequate humanitarian assistance to the people

suffering from the scourge of war.

Cape Verde follows with the same fraternal

solidarity developments in neighbouring Guinea-Bissau,

where the Government is making preparations, with the

assistance of the United Nations and the international

community, to hold free democratic elections.

We look forward to the success of the people of

Guinea-Bissau as it enters a new stage in its life, when

the whole of society is preparing to rebuild its country

and to use all of its resources to improve its living

conditions. We call upon the international community to

provide ongoing generous support to rebuild the country

within this long-term process.

We welcome recent events reflecting the decision of

the United Nations to intervene more concretely to

maintain peace in Africa, particularly in the Democratic

Republic of the Congo and Sierra Leone — and we hope

soon in Eritrea and in Ethiopia.

Today it is clear that our continent is more than ever

determined to harmonize its efforts to control and resolve

conflicts in the region while hoping for the necessary

outside support to strengthen its capacity in this regard.

Regional responsibilities cannot, however, take the place

of the responsibilities of the United Nations, which must

fully play the role given it by the Charter.

As well as efforts to contain and resolve conflicts,

there must be — as has often been stated, but all too

often not put into practice — efforts to prevent them.

They are often rooted in long-standing situations of

injustice, exclusion, inequality and the denial of rights.

The latter is something that individuals, groups and even

whole nations continue to suffer from.

12

Wherever flouted dignity cannot properly voice its

legitimate demands, wherever those demands do not receive

a reasonable response, conflict is brewing. It is true that

some established situations do not lend themselves to rapid

or dramatic change. In those cases sincere dialogue and

healthy compromise may open the way to a progress that

intolerance and lack of willingness can never bring about.

While the conflicts prevailing today are basically

internal, it would be irresponsible for us to ignore the

external factors that feed them. From classic territorial

disputes to more diffuse questions with an impact on the

acquisition of advantages in economic competition, we see

on the international scene various factors that thwart the

desired security and balance. We must replace the narrow

criterion of national self-interest, or its equivalents, as the

paradigm of international affairs with multilateral

participative arrangements based on equity.

Among the items on the agenda that this session

inherited from the previous one, reform of the Security

Council is a key element for rebuilding and revitalizing the

United Nations. For some years it has been the subject of

ongoing negotiations. This entire time, we feel, was needed

for the various bases and arguments underpinning existing

positions and proposals to be properly understood.

The questions posed are complex, and we cannot deny

the relevance of any position. The basic divergence, we

think, lies in the priority given by some to the preservation

of the Council’s effectiveness and by others to the

representation of the current body of Member States. We

believe that the impasse we are facing is clear and that the

consideration we have already given to the matter should

enable us to take decisions in the not-too-distant future.

We believe that increasing the Council’s effectiveness,

while increasing the number of its members, is a challenge

within our grasp. In our view, we should not give more

weight to the size of the gap, which is quite small, between

the various proposals made in this area than to the special

nature of the fundamental principles of representative

participation.

For example, how can one, by attaching more

importance to the question of effectiveness, refuse to give

the African countries, which represent almost 30 per cent

of the United Nations membership, at least two permanent

seats enjoying full powers?

We hope, Mr. President, that under your enlightened

guidance we can make a big leap forward in the

consideration of this important agenda item during the

current session.

Before I conclude, I wish to reiterate what a constant

source of inspiration the Charter is to us. I refer in

particular to the noble and always relevant words of the

preamble, whose implementation will be a constant

challenge to us in the course of the century to come.