Ivory Coast, 1992

We grieved

to learn of the aviation disaster yesterday in Lagos, which caused the death

of 163 members of the Nigerian military. On this sad occasion I should like

to convey to the people and the Government of Nigeria our most sincere

condolences.

First Sir, on behalf of the delegation of Cote d'Ivoire I congratulate

you on your election as President of the current session of the General

Assembly. The confidence expressed in you by the Assembly is recognition both

of you personally and your professionalism and of the important role played by

your country in the achievement of the noble objectives of our Organization.

I should also like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to your

predecessor, Mr. Samir Shihabi, who discharged his responsibilities as

President of the forty-sixth session of the General Assembly with such talent

and dignity.

Finally, I should not forget our Secretary-General,

Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, to whom I should like to address our most sincere

congratulations on the vitality and ability he has demonstrated in the

management of our Organization. His report, which provides an exhaustive view

of the activities of the Organization, enables us to take up our debate with

specific, current information.

We most warmly welcome all those States that have just joined the

Organization, thus highlighting its universality.

Events in recent years have caused serious upheavals in international

relations. The division of the world into two rival blocs is a thing of the

past. The trend towards negotiation and emerging cooperation is the prelude

to a new world order that has yet to take shape. Situations and certainties,

which had in the past seemed immutable are changing, slowly but surely. We

are currently witnessing political, economic, social and cultural

transformations. We hope these developments, which seem to augur new

international relations, will make it possible to meet the challenges of today.

The have-nots of the world greeted with great hope the end of the cold

war, and with the end of the arms race looked to the future sure that the

world was moving towards peace, justice and solidarity.

Unfortunately, while solidarity should have been strengthened,

selfishness and the defence of short-term interests have intensified, to the

detriment of cooperation for the mutual benefit of the various partners in

international relations.

Today the developed countries and the major economic, monetary and

financial institutions have found it necessary to link their assistance to the

establishment of what they consider to be democracy in the recipient

countries, for which it is now a matter of linking the grant of external

financial resources not merely to an economic reform programme based on the

rules of the market, but also to respect for political pluralism.

Regrettably, on the world scale, there is no longer a strategic or

economic alternative that might counter this approach.

If democracy is taken to mean more justice and increased popular

participation in the management of a country's affairs, the Ivorian Government

can be proud of its record.

Indeed, the first version of the Constitution of Cote d'Ivoire, which has

been in effect since independence, provides for a multiparty system, in its

articles 6 and 7.

In Cote d'Ivoire, the idea of democracy has always been part and parcel

of the political process. Democracy and human rights have no borders. They

are universal values, which should nevertheless have national roots. They

cannot be imported, sold or bought, neither can they be imposed from outside.

In international terms, this democratic process should logically entail

greater involvement by States, be they large, small or medium-sized, in the

consideration and solving of international problems of common interest.

Therefore, it is not enough that the United Nations should become more

universal merely within the General Assembly. This trend must also be

reflected in the other principal organs if the Organization's democratic

nature is to be enhanced.

In spite of the progress achieved in various fields, an overview of the

map of the world indicates that the international landscape is still covered

by large grey areas of real and potential conflict. The stability of States

is shaken by violent religious, social, cultural and linguistic struggles, as

well as by unusually grave economic problems.

The countries of the South in general, and African countries in

particular, with their scores of refugees, are still prey to conflicts that

seriously jeopardize the peace and security that are essential for their

development.

In South Africa, while we welcome the considerable progress achieved in

dismantling apartheid, we are saddened by the escalation of violence. In this

regard, we must appeal most urgently to all our South African brothers to put

an end to the violence, massacres and abuses of all types that continue to

cast a pall over the country and further to complicate the already difficult

and complex task of those who are striving to build in South Africa a

democratic, non-racial system through dialogue and negotiation. We welcome

the forthcoming meeting between Mr. Nelson Mandela and Mr. Frederik de Klerk,

and we hope that the negotiations under way will lead to a resumption of the

negotiations within the Convention for a Democratic South Africa.

Elsewhere in Africa internal conflicts with tragic consequences are still

causing upheavals in Somalia, Rwanda and Liberia, to name but a few countries.

With regard to a country on our borders Liberia the Committee of

Five, chaired by President Houphouet-Boigny and set up by the fourteenth

session of the Conference of Heads of State and Government of the Economic

Community of West African States (ECOWAS), held in Abuja on 6 July 1991, met

four times in Yamoussoukro and once in Geneva, in April 1992. The agreement

that emerged from these many meetings, commonly called the Yamoussoukro IV

Agreement, was endorsed by summit meetings of ECOWAS, the Organization of

African Unity and the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries as the best framework

for finding a just and lasting solution to the Liberian crisis.

Nevertheless, military aspects of the implementation of the Agreement

have caused difficulties, with regard to the billeting and disarming of the

belligerents, essential steps for the holding of free, fair and democratic

elections.

The appearance of a new faction, the United Liberation Movement for

Democracy in Liberia (ULIMO), on the scene of the Liberian conflict, has

created a new situation of insecurity, increasing the existing distrust

between the parties to the conflict.

We hope that the new consultations under way, initiated by the President

of ECOWAS and the Chairman of the Committee of the Five, will make possible

reconsideration of the problems of Liberia as a whole in order more

effectively to focus on the factors that will enable all the armed factions to

apply in good faith the provisions of the Yamoussoukro IV Agreement.

We urgently appeal to all Liberians to go a step further and to begin a

constructive dialogue that alone can effectively help the international

community to enable them to find a lasting solution to their problems and to

the future of their country. For his part. President Houphouet-Boigny, who has been working tirelessly

for peace in Africa and throughout the world, will fully support the process

begun in order to solve the Liberian crisis so that the fraternal people of

Liberia, to which we are linked by so many bonds, might finally have peace.

In Angola, after 14 years of liberation struggle against the colonizing

Power followed by 16 years of fratricidal struggle. Cote d'Ivoire commends the

signing of the peace agreements which occurred in Lisbon in May 1991.

Cote d'Ivoire most earnestly hopes that the multipartite elections that are to

be held on 29 and 30 September will take place under the best possible

circumstances so as to enable the fraternal people of Angola freely to choose

their officials and fully to concentrate on the enormous task of

reconstruction and development that lies ahead.

In the Middle East, the Israeli-Arab conflict remains a major and

constant source of concern despite the new peace initiatives that emerged from

the historic Madrid meeting.

Hope, however, has been renewed owing to the recent negotiations during

which we noted with satisfaction an encouraging attitude on the part of the

parties to the conflict, which seem determined to move forward with the peace

process.

The situation in the Persian Gulf still remains alarming, and the

possibility of the conflict resuming cannot be ruled out. Hence we shall

continue fully to support, as we did last year during our mandate in the

Security Council, the complete implementation of all resolutions linked to the

Gulf Crisis, especially Security Council resolution 687 (1991), of

3 April 1991, which lays down the conditions for a permanent cease-fire in the

Gulf governing post-war relations between Iraq and Kuwait.

Furthermore, the quest for increased stability in some States is

accompanied by the troubling phenomenon of sometimes violent disintegration in

other States, in Europe and in various areas of the developing world. The

situation in the Balkans and the tragedy of the people of Bosnia and

Herzegovina are a perfect illustration of this.

Confronted with these various situations, we must seek a new approach to

settling conflicts. Quite rightly, we are now stressing once again the need

for preventive diplomacy, which would have the effect of identifying areas of

potential conflict and stemming crises before they degenerate into armed

confrontation.

That is why my country. Cote d'Ivoire, supports the report of the

Secretary-General on strengthening the capacity of the United Nations for

preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping. This report has the same

objective as that of the Secretary-General of the Organization of African

Unity (OAU), that is, to create mechanisms for the prevention, management and

settlement of conflicts, the principle of which was adopted during the

twenty-eighth regular session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government

of the OAU, which met in Dakar last July.

The concerns and the worries that we reiterated last year from this very

rostrum, which pertained to signs of a slowdown in world economic activity,

have unfortunately become reality, to the extent that we have seen a real

decline in the growth rate of global production of the world economy in 1991,

accompanied by a concomitant drop in the volume of world trade.

In this regard, we should emphasize the substantial drop in the growth

level of imports of industrialized countries, the major export markets for raw

materials produced by developing countries.

The impact of such a situation on African countries has been

catastrophic, since the recession in the industrialized countries has not only

kept raw-materials prices at very low levels, but has also had the consequence

of reducing the quantities exported, thereby causing a very substantial drop

in the export earnings of African countries.

Nevertheless, in spite of the unfavourable economic environment, African

countries including my own. Cote d'Ivoire, in particular have courageously

continued to pursue efforts undertaken as part of the structural adjustment

process and drastic economic reform, with all that this entails in terms of

the risk of social unrest.

As regards my country, those measures have none the less allowed for the

establishment of macro-economic balances, which means that we might achieve a

5 per cent growth rate by 1995.

However, in order to reduce as soon as possible the social cost of

structural adjustment measures, we must resume the still-unfinished debate on

North-South relations between rich and poor countries, between industrialized

countries and those that do not have the means of paying their debts nor of

relaunching their stricken economies.

In this regard, we should, in the financial sphere, come up with a final

solution to external debt problems that takes into account debtor countries'

actual repayment abilities. This restructuring of external debt should be

supplemented by the granting of substantial financial assistance, on

concessional terms, as was the case with Eastern Europe.

While we are asking developing countries to make ever-greater efforts and

sacrifices, we see from the analysis of recent statements by International

Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank heads, Messrs. Michel Camdessus and Lewis Preston, that rich countries are the ones setting a bad example in

managing the world economy. These countries, they say, are not conforming to

any budgetary discipline, which ends up costing developing countries dearly.

Those officials also pointed out that only 5 of the 20 richest countries

in the world have devoted 0.7 per cent of their gross national product to

development assistance, in accordance with the objectives set by the United

Nations. Even the International Development Association (IDA) today appears

to be imperilled in that it is not sure that it will be able to obtain the $18

billion considered absolutely necessary for its functioning.

Contrary to this trend, we welcome Japan's decision to hold, in 1993, a

conference on development in Africa.

As President Houphouet-Boigny has often said: "The real problem of

Africa today is above all economic and financial". He also stated, recently

at the OAU Summit in Dakar, that the only difference between developed and

developing countries is that the former have the technological capacity to

process our raw materials into finished products for their own consumption

and to use any surplus for export, while the latter can only export their raw

materials, be they agricultural, mining or mineral products.

Such a situation must change, and to this end, the assistance and

cooperation of our northern partners should no longer restrict us indefinitely

to the role of providers of raw materials but rather enable us, thanks to the

processing of part or all of our raw materials, to also become consumer

countries.

But pending this development, which should not be delayed, we producers

of raw materials, be they agricultural, mining or mineral products, fervently

hope that the markets for the majority of our commodities will be organized

within the framework of appropriate international agreements that would take

into account the best interests of both consumers and producers.

That is why I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to appeal

most earnestly to the States members of the European Economic Community (EEC),

whose constant support for developing countries has been unfailing, to take

determined action, individually and collectively, in order to foster the

forthcoming conclusion of new international agreements, particularly those

relating to coffee and cocoa, negotiations on which are currently under way.

This is also the place to affirm that, contrary to commonly-held views,

we remain convinced, as far as we are concerned, of the ability of

well-written international agreements on commodities to stabilize markets and

thereby to foster the economic growth of countries that produce raw

materials. Indeed, taking into account the overall importance of raw

materials in the economies of developing countries, and in particular the

extreme dependence of some of them on a single product or small number of

products from which they draw their main source of revenue, we think it

perfectly logical to acknowledge that these markets should be organized in

such a way that, while guaranteeing regular supply for industries using these

products, the prices remain stable so as not only to allow for decent earnings

for the processing industries but also to ensure remunerative prices and

predictable earnings for producer countries.

Furthermore, mutatis mutandis, such thinking underlay the idea of the

common agricultural policy of the European Economic Community (EEC), the major

aim of which was to ensure the security of food supplies within the boundaries

of the community at prices that were reasonable for the consumer and both

stable and remunerative for the rural population.

Indeed, no country in the world can remain indifferent to the drop in

income of its peasants. The United States of America and the member States of

the EEC have understood this so well that they spare no subsidy in helping

their farmers keep their purchasing power on a par with their efforts. It is

therefore difficult for us to understand why the same machinery that has

functioned so well internally and regionally in the Western countries cannot

be usefully adapted internationally within the framework of raw materials in

the relationship between North and South.

Taking all this into consideration, it is perfectly obvious that only the

conclusion of international agreements aimed at promoting stability in the

rates of raw materials at remunerative prices would foster the implementation

of production policies guaranteeing the preservation of the environment. In

this context, it is good that the Rio Conference emphasized the close link

that exists between the deterioration of the environment, indebtedness, and

the deterioration in the terms of trade. Indeed, Cote d'Ivoire, like many

other countries, has had to intensify the exploitation of its natural

resources in order to honour its international financial obligations.

This situation is not in the interests of sustainable development. For

that, as agreed in Rio, the industrialized countries must, as a matter of

urgency, take the necessary steps to help in the transition of our economies

towards sustainable development, especially in implementing decisions aimed at

the elimination of obstacles in the trade of raw or processed goods and the

transfer of new and additional financial resources to developing countries.

In this regard. Agenda 21 has highlighted several ways to achieve the

objectives with regard to the transfer of resources through the following

machinery: through the special increase of resources in the form of the

"Earth Increment" in the World Bank; through the global environmental facility

that will meet next December in Abidjan and whose objective is to increase its

resources from $1.1 billion to $4.5 billion; and through debt alleviation,

especially for middle-income countries.

It is also worth noting that in Rio, several countries promised to

increase their transfer of resources to developing countries, committing

themselves to achieve 1 per cent of their gross national product to official

development assistance by the year 2000. Some of them have announced special

contributions. By way of example, I cite the EEC, which hopes to reach

$4 billion, and Japan, which hopes to reach $8 billion in three years. We can

only express our sincere gratitude for these fortunate initiatives, just as we

commend those countries that have committed themselves to making contributions

during the current session of the General Assembly.

Our hopes are placed in the Commission on Sustainable Development that is

to meet at the ministerial level; its work will be decisive in following up on

the implementation of Agenda 21 programmes and their integration. In this

context, and on behalf of my delegation, I would like to offer my sincere

congratulations to Mr. Maurice Strong for his magnificent work and to ask him

to be kind enough to guide the first steps of the secretariat of that

Commission, because in our view that is essential in order to guarantee the

effective implementation and proficient and speedy follow-up of the

commitments made in Rio.

As regards the critical economic situation in Africa, we remain confident

of the ability of the international community to mobilize itself in the

effective support of the efforts of the African countries to realize the aims

of the new United Nations agenda for the development of Africa for the 1990s

adopted by the General Assembly in December 1991. The elements of this new

agenda, dealing with the last decade of the twentieth century, constitute a

major challenge that Africa must meet with success if it is not to be

irredeemably marginalized at the dawn of the twenty-first century, so full of

promise for humanity.

That is why the African countries, aware of the importance of the current

and future stakes, as well as of their primary responsibility in achieving

growth and sustainable development, have firmly committed themselves to

regional integration and to accelerating the democratization process of their

internal institutions.

That is why is it is important that conditions for growth and development

in Africa be achieved as soon as possible, because they are quite obviously

the sine qua non for the true and realistic exercise of the democracy that

cements peace within African States, peace among African States, and peace

between Africa and the rest of the world.

As President Houphouet-Boigny often says: "Peace and poverty make poor

bedfellows." That is why we exhort the international community to show more

understanding for the question of remunerative prices for raw materials, upon

which many developing countries depend, especially in Africa. Africa needs to

be considered by the rest of the world as a partner rather than a burden. The

partnership it seeks implies dignity rather than dependency, mutual interests

rather than charity.

The bipolar world that has held sway in the international order since

1945 has crumbled. Since the time of Alexander of Macedonia, great empires

have arisen only to collapse in a process that has been broadly described by

Professor Paul Kennedy in his Rise and Fall of the Great Powers.

Every century brings its share of innovations and surprises. The

twentieth century which is now drawing to a close has brought great changes to

human existence. It has seen people invent all sorts of instruments to

advance thought, to cure as well as to kill. Today's world seems to have

found unity through a certain number of values, among which is the primacy of

law in international relations. Such a development can only strengthen the

role of the United Nations in the maintenance of peace.

It is thus up to every State to support the activity of our Organization

in order to enable it to carry out its difficult task effectively. My

country, which has always made a determined search for peace the cornerstone

of its foreign policy, will not fail to make its contribution to the building

of this noble enterprise and to the shaping of the new world order which is

emerging and which, to be solid and lasting, must be linked to the search for

a world of peace, justice, and shared well-being.