Seychelles, 1996

The course of history appears to unwind rapidly

and with it, events occur, pass or recede into time,

imbuing the lives of our societies with the dual sensation

of dizzying progress and desperately slow evolution. It is

essential for people to live in harmony and to face, with

a feeling of unity, goodwill and sharing, the great

challenges which they could not overcome alone. That is

why we are gathered here. We believe that, without each

other, we are weak and vulnerable and that, in order to

live better, it is essential that we be able to share and

work together.

Upon reflection, however, it becomes more and more

clear that some of the countries that are developing more

rapidly, thanks to the advantages of technological and

scientific progress, are losing interest in those still

struggling to survive and still facing economic difficulties,

food shortages and problems of health and education. To

all this can be added other, equally serious evils: the

effects of drugs, alcoholism, criminal behaviour and

prostitution in all its forms.

In our international forums we often speak of

security, of action to combat international terrorism and

of the war on organized crime. Just recently, we were

talking about working together against paedophilia. These

are such horrible, painful things, but unfortunately so

characteristic of our times.

So how can we not strongly condemn these attacks

on human security and dignity? But it is even more

important that our rejection of these crimes affecting the

world be felt with the same degree of intensity, regardless

of the country where they are committed — especially

18

when some countries lack the means to combat the crimes.

Should not the spirit of solidarity imply a concern for the

well-being and security of all the inhabitants of the world?

Should not each and every nation shed its selfish,

hypocritical attitudes?

By not seeing further than our own interests, we treat

others as our lowly tools. And yet we are well aware that

feelings of frustration and injustice are the source of so

much violence which so frequently plunges the world into

mourning and makes people fear for their security.

Therefore, if we want to world to develop harmoniously,

we must break the bonds of this indolent selfishness in

which people see everything around them through the prism

of self-satisfaction.

If the existence of the United Nations is now

threatened and if serious problems are undermining it and

weakening the international community, it is precisely

because the strongest partners will not agree to adopt the

rules that govern any family, in which everyone’s opinions

are heard and discussed and the strong support and help the

weak.

Instead, what do we observe? The most-favoured

nations seem to carry little about and refuse resolutely to

address the realities handicapping the developing countries.

Calculations, assessments, criteria are separated into

categories, mechanically, as if nations and peoples can be

reduced to mere statistics. It must be said that the generous

efforts of some rich countries, while helping developing

countries, also benefit, one way or another, directly and

indirectly, the stingiest countries.

Are we still seeking justice, equality and sustainable

development throughout the world? In any case, the image

the world projects of itself does not reflect these ideals, but

rather two poles spinning further and further apart: the pole

of wealth and the pole of poverty. It’s not that there has

been a lack of international meetings, at the highest levels,

to try to find more effective solutions to reduce the level of

poverty, increase the equity of trade and so forth. But it

seems that, with each meeting, these problems get worse.

The firm ground of progress is crumbling under the

feet of the developing countries and their future — given

their current relations with the Powers holding the reins of

the global economy — seems quite uncertain. This is

especially true for the small island developing States like

the Seychelles, whose only resources are the precarious

revenues of tourism, which is subject to so many

vicissitudes, and fishing. Their meagre resources, pumped

into a network of tremendous competition, require them

to make titanic efforts. Like many other countries whose

territories were long exploited by a great Power and then

suffered the repercussions of being suddenly abandoned

without compensation, the Seychelles’ economy is even

more vulnerable than it was before being buffeted by this

phenomenon.

As they do every year, many speakers have

underscored the importance of preserving the environment

in the context of sustainable development. The President

of the United States himself underscored this fact:

(spoke in English)

“Our planet is safer because of our common efforts

to close Chernobyl, to address the challenges of

climate change, to protect the world’s forests and

oceans. Now we must uphold our duty as custodians

of our environment so that our children will inherit

an even healthier planet.” (Official Records of the

General Assembly, Fifty-first Session, Plenary

Meetings, 6th meeting, p. 14)

(spoke in French)

And, at the annual meeting of the Bretton Woods

institutions, United States Vice-President Albert Gore Jr.

also made this point.

(spoke in English)

“But it also means giving greater attention to

broad issues that I firmly believe must shape and

inform everything we do in our quest for equitable

and sustainable global prosperity. The first of these

is a commitment to sustainable development and our

environment. We now know with perfect clarity that

economic development and growth cannot ignore

ecological realities. We know that investments that

genuinely reduce poverty in an equitable and

enduring way are investments that take their

environmental implications fully into account. Not

only is such an approach consistent with our

development objectives, but it will also be much

more cost effective. Win-win situations are not

always available, but this is one of them and it is

available.”

(spoke in French)

19

And yet, many of our countries, although their survival

depends on the entire world preserving the environment,

find themselves left by the wayside when certain great

Powers — having no further need of the hospitality of their

shores for their military or other installations — light-

heartedly depart, leaving behind them a trail of debris and

other things and leaving it up to the countries themselves to

do the rest. As for the damages and costs — let’s not talk

about them.

As for the reforms of the institutions of the United

Nations system, the Seychelles is in favour of all proposals

aimed at improving the representation of the smaller States

in our work. We believe that the international community

must hear our voices, understand us and deal with the

specifics of our situation. Furthermore, to be more

objective, the assessment criteria now being massively

applied to all the developing countries, which require more

focused attention, should be re-examined in the light of the

vulnerability index. The index is too easily ignored, but is

nonetheless very important in the establishment of the

objective data defining the profile of any given country.

The fashion for what is commonly called “democracy”

is sweeping the surface of the earth, and one of the

principal criteria which the developed countries —

democracy’s self-appointed guarantors — use for deciding

eligibility for development assistance is the establishment

of a democratic system. Shouldn’t that respectable

institution, democracy, be manifest within the Organization

itself when it elects a competent and honest leader in whom

to duly vest its authority? In seeking to impose its logic by

one way or another, in seeking to make its choice the

majority’s choice, we are far from honouring the principle

on which democracy is founded: majority rule. In other

words, for a matter such as the renewal of the mandate of

the United Nations Secretary-General, we should better

gauge the pros and cons, leaving aside those which may

seem a little too individualistic. We must be able to accept,

particularly if qualifications justify it, the choice of the

majority of the Members of this eminently democratic

institution: the United Nations.

To conclude, I express my best wishes for greater

concord in the future of the United Nations, which

represents the voice and the will of the peoples of the

world, so that the endeavour to which so much effort and

generosity has been devoted may produce decisions and

actions that will create for all the children, women and men

of the Earth a way of life in which relations become more

humane and thus more conducive to the advent of a

harmonious global society.