Burkina Faso, 1996

Like some others present here, I too have had the

opportunity to visit Malaysia. Malaysia is a great country,

both in size and because of its outstanding successes in

many areas. But it is a great country above all because of

the quality of the women and men who govern it and who

represent it on the international scene. Ambassador Razali

Ismail is without doubt one of its most eminent

representatives. I am therefore convinced that he will

preside over the work of our 51-year-old Organization with

great cheer and efficiency. I convey to him and to all the

elected members of the Bureau my congratulations and

best wishes for success.

I would also like to congratulate his predecessor,

Mr. Diogo Freitas do Amaral, whose personal qualities

and wealth of experience guided the work of the historic

fiftieth session in an exemplary manner. We wish to

convey our great gratitude to him.

Finally, I pay well-deserved tribute to the Secretary-

General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for his outstanding

efforts to strengthen the role of the United Nations and

for the talent and tenacity with which he has guided the

Organization in these difficult times.

In July 1996, the Assembly of Heads of State and

Government of the Organization of African Unity adopted

in Yaoundé, Cameroon, a declaration expressing its

appreciation for and stressing the work done by

Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali at the helm of the United

Nations. According to tradition and the rules of fairness,

Africa is entitled to a second mandate, which we hope

will come about.

The current trends on the international scene are

disquieting. The sovereign equality of States and the

principle of free trade are being damaged by unilateral

measures, despite the fact that the General Assembly of

the United Nations has reaffirmed these principles and the

strict respect that should be accorded to them. Moreover,

we are facing a financial crisis that is essentially caused

by the default on payments of assessed contributions due

to the Organization. The overwhelming majority of

speakers who have preceded me have said that this

practice is unacceptable, particularly on the part of those

who have the capacity to pay.

The procedures and decision-making process of the

Security Council are still fairly opaque, despite some

minor openings. The geographical origins of the

permanent members run counter to the principle of

equitable geographical distribution. The cause of this is

historical, but this perception is now more widespread and

stark, 51 years after the creation of the Organization. Yet

today, through the deliberations and decisions of the

Security Council, a veritable body of substantive

international law, armed with sanctions and strewn with

ad hoc tribunals, is emerging. After 51 years, the General

Assembly, the pedestal and guarantor of this structure,

finds itself stripped of its powers and even of its

functions.

We cannot compare the General Assembly to the

Security Council but recent developments in these two

bodies have accentuated their differences instead of

emphasizing their complementarity, which is not a healthy

situation. Ironically, this situation coincides with the

vehement, ongoing clamour for transparency and democracy

everywhere. The reform of the United Nations system is

understood in various ways and we have yet to find the

formula that can be supported by everyone. Difficulties

arise from the demands of some and the reluctance of

others. Clearly, reform must be a joint effort or it will not

come about. We are concerned because all of these

combined factors might encourage the disturbing trends to

which I referred earlier.

Indeed, the financial situation of the United Nations is

central to the significance and future of our Organization.

An institution, a community of men and women, can be

created by force — can, for a time, be maintained by

force — but it is not force that makes them last. The idea

of leadership is based on the ability to take decisions as

well as on moral authority. Moral authority is based on the

ability to convince the majority in a lasting and complete

way. To be followed without conviction is to run the risk

of abandonment as soon as short cuts can be safely taken.

The joint aspiration of the States Members of the

United Nations was, is and must remain that of following

a common path beneficial to all. It is no coincidence that in

the Charter, drafted at the end of a conflict in which

Powers imposed themselves on other Powers, spirit and

letter came together so that States large and small could

feel involved as much in the responsibilities and decision-

making as in the outcome. Hence the principle of the

sovereign equality of States, who assumed that, regardless

of their size or importance, each should participate to the

best of its ability in the functioning of the Organization

because, in this way, each worked equally to attain the

principles and purposes of the Charter. Nor is it a

coincidence that those which bore a greater burden in this

respect were given a privilege in the Security Council,

though it was to be exercised on behalf of all and for the

benefit of all.

What is happening nowadays? The United Nations is

unique. It is political. Its role and its objectives are very

special. How can we, therefore, try to see it as a company

whose shareholders want to move it in a particular direction

on the basis of the number of shares they hold? How could

we continue to call ourselves United Nations? The United

Nations has charge over destinies and people. It is also an

institution that must be managed, but one in which

everyone has a place.

I have dwelt at length on this point because Burkina

Faso is a community of men that understands, appreciates

and supports the fact that the United Nations is

irreplaceable. It is an instrument which has no equal and

we desire a world of fraternity and progress.

Africa is fighting for its development, although beset

by crises and conflicts, such as those in Liberia and

Burundi. In Liberia, after the events of April 1996, the

summit meeting of the Committee of Nine and a certain

open-mindedness on the part of faction leaders calmed the

situation, permitted the nomination of a new Head of

State in the person of Ms. Ruth Perry, opened up

prospects for the holding of elections. We encourage this

trend.

In Burundi, a military coup d’état swept away

civilian rule, but the fraternal States of the subregion

rejected fait accompli by ordering sanctions. We are

therefore concerned by the situation in that country, which

has already been traumatized by numerous ethnic

conflicts. The international community should pay heed

to that and provide resources.

Turning to the subject of Taiwan, Burkina Faso

would refer to the principle of universality in the matter

of representation of 22 million people. We hope that an

ad hoc committee will be established.

Poverty is on the rise. It is the result of the policies

of the countries that control the markets. Poverty is also

the consequence of unequal distribution among the

developing countries. In all cases, statements on both

sides very often sound like incantations crashing against

the wall of cold implacable reality. The idea of

globalization, paradoxically, goes hand in hand with that

of fragmentation, both political and economic. The world

conferences held over the past six years have promoted

the concept of partnership. We still need to give that

concept real content and weight. Unfortunately, we still

possess neither of these despite real efforts by some

partners of the North. Invective, tirades of complaint and

exhortations have not advanced the debate nor brought us

closer to the right solutions.

From 16 to 20 September 1996, we held the mid-

term review of the United Nations New Agenda for the

Development of Africa in the 1990s. We thank

Ambassador Owada and his country, Japan, for their

3

interest in the development of Africa. However, we must

acknowledge that the results of our negotiations with our

other partners continue to fall short of our expectations,

needs and priorities, although Africa has largely met its

commitments. The same goes for the mid-term review

undertaken by the United Nations Children’s Fund on the

outcome of the World Summit for Children. Increased

resources are necessary and expected.

Self-control is the beginning of wisdom, but it is not

enough without an enabling environment. From the

discussions in the Uruguay Round to the creation of the

World Trade Organization, this point is constantly being

borne out. Solidarity, the key word, must prevail and guide

our actions if we want a global village, not just a series

of enclaves that are more or less fortunate and in the long

run condemned to mutual destruction.

Multilaterlism could prevent that fate, especially

since we are now seeing that the State is surrendering

control over certain elements of its sovereignty.

Everywhere, structures and organizations with varying

degrees of legality are transcending States and

establishing transnational networks and relations. It is

therefore imperative that we keep pace with these trends

and adapt now and in the future our special instrument,

our common instrument: the United Nations at the service

of peoples. Political will is what will make the difference.