Ethiopia, 1994

Allow me first to extend to

Ambassador Amara Essy heartfelt congratulations on his

unanimous election to preside over the forty-ninth session

of the General Assembly. His election is a fitting tribute

both to him and to his country, Côte d’Ivoire. While

expressing our confidence in his skills and capacity to guide

this session to a successful conclusion, I wish to assure him

of the full cooperation of my delegation in the discharge of

the heavy responsibility he has assumed.

I wish also to join the heads of delegations who spoke

before me in the very pleasant task of welcoming the new

democratic South Africa into the United Nations. The

recent happy events in South Africa mark a turning point in

the history of Africa. They have opened up new vistas for

fruitful economic cooperation across the African continent

and have allowed the international community to be

victorious over institutional racism.

It has now been a few years since the international

community entered into a new era that is relatively free

of ideological polarization. The nuclear confrontation that

had haunted the international community before the end

of the cold war is now more or less behind us. The

demise of the cold war has in this regard contributed to

the lifting of the thick veil that had hindered the

appreciation of our interdependence. None of the major

problems of the present world can be effectively dealt

with in the absence of an approach that takes seriously

the fact that we live in an interdependent world. The

challenges of the environment, the problems of climate

change, the unrestrained growth in population and

questions of economic growth and development, among

others, are all issues that call for greater cooperation

between States.

It is not too early for us to assess to what extent the

international community has taken advantage of new

opportunities and, with the major obstacles to joint action

having now been removed, how much progress the world

has made in addressing the critical problems facing us.

Some of these ostensibly affect only part of humanity,

but, in fact, are directly or indirectly the problems of the

international community as a whole.

The ever-deteriorating economic and social

conditions faced by the majority of the peoples in the

developing world and the abject poverty in which they are

condemned to live are the most critical challenge facing

the world. The effects of this reality reverberate through

all aspects of international life, and they impinge on all

issues now routinely accepted as the common challenges

of the international community. Actions designed to deal

with concerns related to international peace and security,

to the environment, to climate change, to population

growth and development and to a host of other

interrelated concerns will remain only off-target and, at

best, partial measures if most of the developing world is

allowed to continue to wallow in poverty, and if, as a

consequence, despair and hopelessness continue to be the

dominant mood of present and future generations in the

South.

In Africa, for instance, where a genuine fear of

marginalization in international economic cooperation has

in recent years become the prevailing mood, much of the

explanation for the scale, intensity and duration of the

conflicts must be sought in the continent’s continuing

economic decline and in the consequent social malaise

and hopelessness generated by that sad reality. The

economic history of Africa over the last two decades is

21

one of precipitate decline. The 1980s was a lost decade,

but the first half of the present one is proving to be no

better.

Each African conflict may have its own unique local

as well as extra-local features, but all of them, in one way

or another, grow out of the humanly impossible economic

and social situations that provide societies with neither hope

nor a future.

From Liberia to Somalia and from Rwanda to

Burundi, what Africa has been witnessing in recent years is

the virtual collapse, under the weight of unbearable

economic and social difficulties, not only of State structures

but also of traditional values and norms of social

organization.

It seems therefore overdue for the United Nations,

when it comes to addressing conflict situations such as

those in Africa, to think and to act with the clear

assumption that traditional notions of preventive diplomacy,

peace-keeping and peace-making, although important, are

not enough to maintain the peace and to make it durable.

"An Agenda for Peace" will be far from sufficient if it doe

not go side by side with, and made an integral part of, "An

Agenda for Development".

In our part of the world, the Organization of African

Unity (OAU) took up a huge challenge when it decided to

increase its capacity by setting up a mechanism for the

prevention, management and resolution of conflicts. This

is an important step that requires the effective assistance of

the international community, and we are appreciative of the

support already being given to the OAU by some countries.

But we have no illusions: even if the OAU had the

capacity required to carry out its mandate in preventive

diplomacy, it would not necessarily be able to make

substantial inroads in ensuring durable peace in the

continent.

Nor can the United Nations and the international

community do any better unless the challenges faced in

connection with preventive measures in the economic and

social areas are taken up in the most serious manner and

unless the economic and social decline of Africa is

reversed. The bottom line is that no African country can

categorically be said to be immune from the political and

social consequences of the immense level of economic

decline, which can be arrested only with the requisite level

of international economic cooperation and development

partnership. This, incidentally, could also be a way to

arrest and contain all varieties of extremism.

It seems to us that it is only with the foregoing in

mind and with the full appreciation of the very complex

nature of some of the conflict situations in Africa that the

United Nations can be an effective factor for peace in

Africa. This approach would also allow the international

community to appreciate fully actual movement, no

matter how small, in the right direction towards the

resolution of specific conflict situations in Africa. The

validity of this is most clearly to be seen in the prevailing

situation in Somalia.

More than a few still view the situation in Somalia

as having shown no improvement and believe that

conditions in that country have in fact deteriorated. That

view is probably the major reason for the increasing calls

for the speedy withdrawal of the United Nations

Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM) from Somalia. That

view is also certainly behind the latest Security Council

resolution on Somalia.

The situation in Somalia, and most particularly in

some parts of that country, is clearly still far from

normal, and there is no question that the overall situation

in the country is very fluid. The international

community’s frustration at the slow pace of the national-

reconciliation process and at the lack of sufficient

commitment by all sides in Somalia to their responsibility

to sort out their own problems as speedily as possible is

also understandable, and this is also our concern.

But the feeling that conditions in the country have

become hopeless and that the general trend in Somalia

holds no promise is not born of what has been taking

place there since late last year. That the situation in

Somalia today, from the point of view both of the level

of armed clashes and of dialogue between Somalis of all

factions, is far better than it was a year ago, or indeed a

few months ago, cannot seriously be doubted.

No one can pretend to have a ready-made solution

to the problem of power-sharing in Somalia, which has

been one of the major hurdles preventing national

reconciliation. The OAU and the countries of the

subregion have continued to do everything possible to

assist the Somalis to meet this challenge, firmly

convinced that the agenda for peace and national

reconciliation in the country should be set by Somalis

themselves and that the role of extra-Somali parties,

including that of UNOSOM, is to assist in the process.

We believe that this has been a very fruitful approach. It

is the one that has been adopted from the very beginning

by President Meles Zenawi, whose OAU colleagues have

22

given him the responsibility of following developments in

Somalia.

From his station in Mogadishu, President Meles’s

envoy has been maintaining very close contact with the

various Somali factions. Our general assessment is that the

trends in Somalia are encouraging and that the Somalis are

taking the first hesitant steps to sort out their problems.

Although there is no guarantee of success, the general

thrust of developments in Somalia is worthy of the support

of the international community.

At this time last year UNOSOM was engaged in heavy

combat with some Somali factions, and its presence in

Somalia did not enjoy universal acceptance there. Today,

the situation has changed so dramatically that there is

consensus in the country that UNOSOM should stay, one

way or another, until national reconciliation is achieved. It

would indeed be ironic if the international community were

to choose to ignore Somalia precisely when the situation is

changing for the better.

The efforts of the countries of the Horn of Africa in

the search for solutions to situations of conflicts have not

been limited to Somalia. It is little more than a year since

we in the subregion deployed the initiative of the Inter-

Governmental Authority on Drought and Development

(IGADD) with a view to assisting in the resolution of the

long-standing conflict in the Sudan - a conflict which has

created a deep rift in Sudanese society, and whose

implications for peace and security, as well as for the social

and economic development of our region, are very great

indeed.

In the course of the negotiations, the IGADD

Committee’s major goal was to help the parties to identify

and address the central issues that have been the sources of

the conflict in the Sudan - a country characterized by

religious, ethnic and racial diversity. Pursuant to

instructions from our Heads of State, the IGADD

Committee of Foreign Ministers attempted, in a series of

rounds of negotiation, to help the parties to narrow their

differences over the root causes of the conflict and to arrive

at a formula for overcoming the deep crisis affecting their

countries. Because the IGADD process induced the parties

to focus on the critical issues in the conflict, positions have

become well defined. The degree of polarity reflected in

these positions reveals the gravity of the root causes and

explains why the talks have come to deadlock. Thus, the

IGADD peace process is at a crossroads in that the

positions of the parties have hardened, and the mediators

are left to choose between abandoning their efforts and

developing alternative strategies in response to the crisis.

Faced with this situation, the Ministerial Committee

was compelled ultimately to refer the matter back to the

IGADD Committee of Heads of State, which met recently

in Nairobi. The Heads of State, while recognizing the

logjam that has been created in the process of negotiation,

have none the less unanimously decided that there is no

alternative to continuing with the peace effort. The major

consideration here has been the conviction of the Heads

of State that a persisting crisis in the Sudan would be not

only a cause of continuing bloodshed in that country but

also a major source of instability and lack of peace in the

subregion.

In this regard, the importance of the international

community’s input towards breaking the logjam in the

IGADD peace initiative in the Sudan can hardly be

underestimated. A solution to the problem can come only

through the continued efforts of the countries of the

region and the international community’s support for

those efforts.

We in Ethiopia have had more than our share of the

tragedies associated with conflicts. It is three years since

peace was restored to the country following three decades

of civil war and internal strife. Over the past three years

the Transitional Government has focused its attention on

three broad concerns - the restoration of peace and

stability; the democratization of the political process,

including the creation of conditions for enforcing the rule

of law and setting up democratic institutions; and the

liberalization of the economy and the freeing of the

economic sector from the strait-jacket of the command

economy imposed on our peoples by the military

Government.

One of the unique aspects of the democratization

process in Ethiopia has been the very extensive

devolution of power to all regions of the country. In a

country known for its excessive centralization of power -

something that was pushed to absurdity by the previous

Government: the major reason for the absence of peace

in Ethiopia for so long - the new relationship between the

centre and the regions is becoming a promising

arrangement for genuine and meaningful participation of

the people, at the grass-roots level, in the political process

of their country. We believe that once democracy

becomes relevant to the average person and at the grass

roots, it will prove to be durable because the struggle

between autocracy and democratic forms of governance

23

will not then be between very narrow, elite groups, whether

from the military or from other sectors of society.

As we approach the end of the period of transition in

Ethiopia, we can say with full confidence that we have, by

and large, achieved all the major objectives set for that

period. Until three years ago Ethiopia’s name was

associated with political instability and civil war. Today

Ethiopia has not only achieved peace but also become a

factor for peace in its own subregion and beyond, as is

vividly demonstrated by the Ethiopian peace-keeping

contingent in Rwanda.

Moreover, we have been gratified by the recent

successful elections for a Constituent Assembly, which will

be convened very soon to prepare a constitution on the

basis of which a general election will be held to install the

first-ever democratically elected Government in the country.

In the course of the last three years, we in Ethiopia

have benefited immensely from the generous assistance of

the international community, for which we are very

grateful. This assistance was again demonstrated during the

recent drought, which affected over 7 million people.

Thanks to the assistance of the international community, to

the role the Ethiopian people themselves played and to the

timely, effective measures taken by the Government, the

effects of a drought that could have caused massive loss of

life, dislocation and displacement commensurate with those

of the 1984-1985 drought were successfully contained.

Even though Ethiopia has now started to stand on its

own feet, we cannot pretend that we have even remotely

begun to address the major challenges still facing us. The

fledgling democratic process in a country with no

democratic traditions will continue to be a major challenge.

But the political will to solidify grass-roots democracy will

always be there, among other things because the survival of

countries as diverse as Ethiopia can be ensured only on the

basis of democratic governance. However, the linchpin of

the success of democracy in Ethiopia, as is also true for all

similarly situated countries, is sustainable economic growth

and development. Citizens who see no future for

themselves or for their offspring can hardly be counted on

- and for understandable reasons - to be a bedrock for

stable Governments, without which democracy will have

little chance of flourishing.

None the less, even in the economic sector we have

made some notable gains, and our cooperation with the

international financial institutions has so far been very

encouraging. But the challenges ahead of us are immense,

and we will continue to count on the support of the

international community to help us put our country firmly

on the path of sustainable growth and development.

One of the major positive outcomes of the demise of

the cold war has been the new confidence placed in

multilateral approaches to solving the major problems

faced by our interdependent world. The United Nations,

as the finest expression of multilateralism, has thus been

given a new opportunity to make a difference in the

world and to spearhead the efforts of the international

community for peace and development. In this context,

the democratization of the United Nations at all levels,

and greater transparency in the operation of the organs of

the Organization, including that of the Security Council

and of the Secretariat, are some of the required steps

which will guarantee that the United Nations can play to

the fullest its potential appropriate role as the foremost

multilateral organization with the full confidence of

peoples in the North as well as in the South. For our

part, we will continue to do our share, and do all that is

necessary to assist the United Nations in achieving its

noble objectives and goals.