Iceland, 1982

As we come to this session of the General

Assembly, the international situation is in some

respects more serious than it has been since the

end of the Second World War and the establishment

of the Organization. The quantity of armaments is

much greater, weapons are more devastating,

hunger more severe, destitution more extensive,

and the curse of unemployment more far- reaching

than ever before since the establishment of the

Organization. We have certainly made some gains

and that we must not forget. But much more

glaring are the cases where success has been

limited, or when no results at all were achieved.

I intend to deal with a few of those aspects here.

283. When I addressed the General Assembly in

September 1981 meeting, I referred to a number

of provisions of the Charter and of the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights. I compared the

words to the deeds. In the past year there has

been a continual deterioration in these matters

in many parts of the world. Amongst the most

serious events are those in the Middle East and

in Poland, although they are different in nature.

But, regrettably, a number of further examples

could be cited.

284. In his report on the work of the

Organization, the Secretary-General raises a

matter of great concern, namely, the increased

lack of respect for Security Council resolutions.

I endorse whole-heartedly his words of warning

that we are perilously near to international

anarchy. The structure of the Organization, and

in particular the veto, has been both its

strength and its weakness. Changes in that basic

structure could result in the collapse of the

Organization, and therefore I do not regard such

changes as being open to debate. But it is

evident that the ability of the United Nations to

promote the peaceful settlement of disputes is

virtually non-existent when a State with veto

powers perceives its direct or indirect interests

threatened by actions of the Organization. Such

situations occur more and more frequently. In

addition, there is an increasing tendency by

other States to feel that they are strong enough

to defy the unanimous decisions of the Security

Council. They are confident that the unity of

purpose of the Organization is not such that

words will be translated into action. That trend

must be reversed. It cannot be achieved by

amending the Charter of the United Nations but,

rather, as a result of nations becoming

increasingly cognizant of the danger to world

peace if those developments continue.

285. At the recent meeting of the Nordic

Foreign Ministers, the strong support of the

Nordic countries was reaffirmed for the United

Nations and for measures aimed at settling

international disputes by peace-ful means, in

accordance with the principles of the Charter

concerning respect for the territorial integrity

and political independence of all States. In that

context an appeal was made to all States to

respect the internationally accepted rules

guiding relations between States. It was declared

that the Nordic countries would continue to work

to strengthen the United Nations as a universal

organization for peace. Further-more, the

ministers were in agreement on the need to

examine and to discuss with other States measures

which could strengthen the ability of the

Organization to act in conflicts and crises. I

draw attention to those statements of the Nordic

Foreign Ministers and reiterate the appeal

contained therein.

286. The situation in the Middle East has been

discussed in the United Nations from its

inception. But still we seem far from a peaceful

solution of these disputes, which constantly

poison the atmosphere and cause the inhabitants

of the region suffering and death. That tragedy

culminated in the massacre in the refugee camps

in Beirut earlier this month. All those who wish

to uphold respect for the Charter must insist on

an independent investigation of that crime as

soon as possible.

287. The invasion of Lebanon by Israel is one

more episode in a long history of revenge and

retaliation in the Middle East. At the same time,

it is a tragic example of the disrespect for

Security Council deci-sions to which I have

referred. I declare my full support for the

United Nations resolutions condemning the

invasion and occupation of Lebanon by Israel and

its refusal to abide by the Security Council

resolutions.

That behavior increases the difficulty of

attaining a comprehensive, just and lasting

solution of the disputes in this area. Such a

solution must be based on Security Council

resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and must

safeguard the security of all States in the

region, including Israel, and ensure justice for

all peoples, including the Palestinians. In that

connection, I would also emphasize in particular

the necessity for realizing the legitimate

national rights of the Palestinians through the

exercise of their right to self- determination,

including their right to participate in

negotiations on their own future.

288. I welcome the proposals for a solution of

the major problems in the Middle East which have

been put forward by the President of the United

States and the Arab Summit Conference. It is

still too soon to predict whether those proposals

can form a basis for negotiations by all the

parties, but I sincerely hope that they will.

Indeed, many elements of both proposals are

worthy of further consideration.

289. I should like to turn briefly to a number

of other questions, questions which are the most

blatant examples of the disrespect for the

equality, sovereignty and political independence

of all nations. These are principles which should

be respected under the Charter of the United

Nations but which are in fact disregarded in

practice when the more powerful States perceive

their interests to be better served thereby.

290. The situation in Afghanistan has not

improved since we met here one year ago. The

military occupation has now lasted nearly three

years. Efforts continue with limited success to

force the submission of the people and compel

them to resign themselves to the situation.

Repeated United Nations resolutions are

disregarded. Much the same can indeed be said of

war- torn Kampuchea.

291. Just over two years ago, new waves of

freedom spread through Polish society. The people

sought a greater voice in their own affairs.

Agreements were reached with the authorities on a

slight relaxation of controls and the

establishment of free trade unions was allowed.

These tendencies towards freedom were to be

short-lived. They ended with the imposition of

martial law on 13 December 1981.

292. A list of this kind could be long. There

are many States which suffer under

totalitarianism and oppression where the

principles of the Charter are ignored.

293. While such situations recur at short

intervals, it is extremely difficult to lower the

tension in international relations and to

proceed to effective and realistic measures to

promote and preserve peace and security in

accordance with the fundamental aims of the

Organization. Such measures are indeed essential

now.

294. The quantity of armaments is of a much

greater dimension and weapons are more menacing

than those the world has ever seen before; but

still the frantic arms race continues. The debate

on who is the most powerful could no doubt go on

a J in/M/Mm. In fact, the debate would probably

not be resolved unless the unthinkable should

happenóthat the big Powers put the matter to the

test. It is not likely that many would be left to

judge the outcome, and the winner would not be in

a very much more enviable position than the

loser. The weapons of mass destruction can at any

time bring total devastation to mankind. The

nuclear Powers carry a heavy burden. They are,

indeed, responsible for the fate of the world.

295. Mankind has but one option. The only

alternative which would not sooner or later lead

to destruc-tion is effective and genuine

agreements on arms reduction as a first step on

the long road to total disarmament, which should

beóindeed must beóthe vision of those who believe

in the high principles of the Charter.

2%. The demand for realistic action on

disarmament is more pronounced now than it has been

for a long time. In that light, it is tragic to

have to admit that the second special session on

disarmament yielded practically no results. We

must therefore hope and trust that concrete

results will be achieved in the negotiations

between the United State s and the Soviet Union

on reducing stockpiles of a number of the main

types of nuclear weapons, in the negotiations on

mutual and balanced force reductions and in the

work of the Committee on Disarmament and, of

course, at the Madrid Conference on Security and

Co-operation in Europe, should it result in an

agreement on a conference on confidence-building

measures and disarmament in Europe. The

implementation of disarmament must be based on

reciprocity. Anything else would be neither

realistic nor justifiable. The aim should be to

achieve a balanceónot a balance of terror, but a

balance based on a reduction, not an increase, of

arms.

297. As a representative of an island nation

which depends for its existence on the living

resources of the sea, I am bound to express grave

concern about the increased armaments in the

oceans and, in particular, the enlarged fleets of

submarines armed with nuclear weapons. Even in

peacetime, an accident under adverse conditions

could destroy the economic basis of such nations.

Thus I would emphasize that the proper response

to the opposition of people in continental

Europe and America to an even greater increase in

the number of nuclear missiles in their countries

is not to move these weapons to the oceans but,

rather, to agree to a real reduction. Only thus

will the threat posed by such weapons be

diminished.

298. As regards the law of the sea, I would

call on those countries which are still not

prepared to agree to the Convention to reconsider

their position. Through the participation of all

nations in the Convention on the Law of the Sea,

we can avoid severe conflicts between individual

States on various law-of-the-sea issues and thus

take an important step towards the world

structure to which we aspire in the Charter.

299. Earlier, I dealt particularly with States

and their relations with other States and the

lack of respect which is all too often evident in

those relations. It is a fact that it is usually

the individual human being who is the victim in

such circumstances, although in the name of

safeguarding the interests of one State against

another. But it is the responsibility of each

Stateóand indeed an obligation undertaken by all

the States Members of the United Nationsóto

ensure respect for the individual and for human

rights. That obligation is unfortunately not

complied with by a large number of Governments

which here represent the inhabitants of their

countries. This is even true of many Governments

which in other respects abide by their

international obligations.

300. In referring to fundamental human rights,

I include therein the right of every human being

to an equitable share in the world's resources.

Other human rights are of little avail to those

with no prospects but starvation. It must

therefore be one of the principal aims of the

Organization to strive to ensure that every child

bom in this world has sufficient food and health

care and education in accordance with his or her

ability. The mottes of this session of the

General Assembly might, indeed, be decreased

hunger, lower military expenditures and increased

respect for international obligations.