Jamaica, 2005

I would like to

congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the

presidency of the current session of the General

Assembly. May I also express our deep appreciation to

Mr. Jean Ping for so ably guiding the work of the

General Assembly during its fifty-ninth session.

I am honoured to address the General Assembly

today in my capacity as Chairman of the Group of 77

and China. Five years ago, I was among the leaders of

nations, rich and poor, who met here under the auspices

of the United Nations and made a compact to rid the

world of the most dehumanizing conditions afflicting a

24

large portion of humankind. That was a solemn pledge

made by us to the most disadvantaged peoples of our

world — the poor, the hungry, the illiterate, the

homeless, the sick — to infants, mothers and the

unborn, as well as to nature, which must sustain the

existence of the whole human race.

This year’s Human Development Report of the

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

reveals that one fifth of humanity survives on less than

$1 per day, and that 2.5 billion people fail to earn $2

daily. The recently concluded High-level Plenary

Meeting has revealed that we have made slight

progress, more so in a few regions, to meet some of the

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). But we are

nowhere on track to achieving the promises of any of

the major development-oriented United Nations

conferences or summits held since the adoption of the

MDGs. Progress has been uneven. At the current pace,

some regions and countries will miss several of the

MDGs by decades. In certain areas, such as the

elimination of hunger, we could be centuries away.

We are likely to miss global targets in the areas of

infant and maternal mortality, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis,

malaria and other infectious diseases and

environmental sustainability. Limited financial

resources, debt, restricted asymmetrical trade

opportunities and HIV/AIDS have been identified as

major inhibiting factors. Beyond those constraints,

during the past five years many developing countries

have suffered devastating natural disasters, which have

disrupted economic growth, damaged production,

destroyed infrastructure and dislocated populations,

causing economic losses that amount to years of gross

domestic product (GDP). Development goals and

targets cannot be met within the time frames without a

massive addition of resources, both financial and

technical. No one can remain safe and secure, or even

content, while living in an oasis of wealth surrounded

by a desert of poverty.

Not to be forgotten is the unfulfilled agenda of

gender equity. The empowerment of women must be a

vital ingredient in all our social and economic

programmes.

We agreed at Monterrey on a comprehensive

approach to mobilize the financing needed for real

global development that specified the contributions

required from developing and developed countries

alike. Our review has revealed that, as a group,

developing countries have delivered on their

commitments. Most have achieved a level of economic

growth and have increased domestic resources and

foreign-exchange reserves. There has been a

strengthened focus on South/South cooperation, which

has seen trade among developing countries growing

faster than their total export trade and an increasing

flow of investment.

At the second South-South Summit, held in Qatar

in June, we agreed on a major programme of

South/South cooperation that is already having results.

I shall cite just two examples. First, the Governments

of Qatar, China and India pledged donations at the

Summit to launch a South fund for development and

humanitarian assistance. Secondly, last week at

Montego Bay, Jamaica, the President of the Bolivarian

Republic of Venezuela signed, with several Caribbean

Governments, the Petrocaribe Energy Cooperation

Agreement to enhance energy security, facilitate socio-

economic development and advance regional economic

integration in the Caribbean. This is a most positive

initiative at a time of high and volatile energy prices

and insecure supplies.

From our partners in the developed world there

has been a gradual recovery of private foreign direct

investment and in the provision of official development

assistance (ODA). We welcome the increase in debt

relief, including debt cancellation, for many of the

most highly indebted poor countries, as well as the

renewed focus on Africa and on HIV/AIDS.

However, the review has also revealed some

trends that are cause for anxiety, and therefore worthy

of our attention. First, a significant part of the

resources mobilized by developing countries has been

used to finance debt-servicing payments to multilateral

development banks and to increase foreign-exchange

reserves held in developed countries. That has led to

net transfers to developed countries every year since

1998. Secondly, foreign direct investment has been

concentrated in, and is becoming almost confined to,

the larger, faster-growing developing countries.

Thirdly, the increase in ODA since 2000 has largely

been the result of resources targeted for emergency

assistance, debt relief and technical assistance.

Together they accounted for 50 cents of every aid

dollar in 2004. Fourthly, debt relief has been limited to

those highly indebted poor countries which have

satisfied International Monetary Fund (IMF) conditions

for disbursements. Fifthly, the terms of trade continue

25

to work against commodity- and preference-dependent

developing countries. And sixthly, the sudden erosion

of trade preferences has created significant economic

hardships for many developing countries without the

resources or time to diversify their export base. The net

result is that there have been insufficient new resources

available to the vast majority of developing countries

to invest in meeting long-term development goals.

Policy space for developing countries to act

effectively and the timing and quality of the resource

flows are also very important. In this regard, the Group

of 77 and China calls for the elimination of aid

conditionalities which restrict the policy options for

developing countries and thereby the real effectiveness

of development cooperation.

Further, we stress the need to cease the use of

unilateral coercive measures against developing

countries. It is wrong to apply the weight of economic

power to pressure developing countries for political

purposes. This causes severe hardships and jeopardizes

development efforts, including the achievement of the

Millennium Development Goals.

There are developing countries which face

peculiar, if not unique, development challenges. The

Group of 77 and China has consistently argued that

Africa, the least developed countries, the landlocked

developing countries and the small island developing

States face special and tremendous challenges. These

are magnified in a globalized, liberalized and

competitive international economic environment and

with the increasing incidence of more devastating

natural disasters.

The arguments are gaining acceptance. There are

now internationally agreed programmes for the last

three named groups and an emerging consensus for a

special programme for Africa under African

leadership. The special programmes for these groups of

countries were reaffirmed at our High-level Plenary

Meeting. We now need to implement them with

urgency.

We have long recognized that export trade is the

most sustainable source of resources for development

as well as the best stimulant to investment and

employment. The current international trading rules

and systems are heavily stacked against developing

countries. We must resolve to transform international

trade into an engine of growth. The policies, rules and

modalities of global trade must have development

focus. Why have we failed so miserably to fulfil the

Doha mandate for a development round? We sent only

the feeblest of messages from the High-level Plenary

Meeting to our trade ministers, but unless they are

given firm instructions to afford special and differential

treatment to developing countries, the December

Ministerial Conference of the World Trade

Organization (WTO) in Hong Kong will, like those

held in Seattle and Cancun, yield a dismal collapse.

We agreed in Monterrey that it was necessary to

reform the international economic system and make it

more coherent and supportive of the development

policies of Member States. We also agreed that it was

necessary to increase the voice and participation of

developing countries in the international financial and

trade institutions. Yet nothing has happened. We cannot

allow the Bretton Woods institutions to remain forever

impervious to our calls. To attain the agreed

development objectives, there must be a renunciation

of the ill-conceived policies imposed on a number of

developing countries under structural adjustment

programmes begun three decades ago.

We might dispute the causes and the sharing of

responsibility, but no longer do we dispute the

awesome reality of climate change. The evidence that

climate change poses a long-term challenge to every

part of the globe is irrefutable.

Developing countries have maintained that

climate change and other unsustainable pressures on

our environment demand urgent attention. Developed

countries must take the lead in changing production

and consumption patterns: in an approach to the

development and transfer of environmentally sound

technology to developing countries on a preferential

basis; in their level of commitment and support to fight

against desertification and land degradation; and in the

resources to be devoted to the management of waste

and in the change towards the promotion of a culture of

recycling. We must keep on pressing for the

development and adoption of strategies that mitigate,

and build resilience to, the impact of climate change.

I have spoken thus far on development issues.

But these are closely related to other critical areas of

the international agenda. One such area is disarmament

and arms control, which is in danger of becoming a

neglected and forgotten goal of the United Nations.

The link between disarmament and development is

even more relevant today. The figures are indeed

26

startling. Roughly $1 trillion is now spent annually on

weapons and military equipment of all kinds,

consuming a massive share of the world’s resources. If

such resources were channelled into development, the

world would not only be more prosperous, it would be

much safer and more secure.

Our concern is not just about nuclear weapons. It

is also about the proliferation of guns of every

description, which endangers the lives of ordinary

citizens, undermines the rule of law and threatens

social stability. Those who manufacture such weapons

must exercise greater control and support anti-

proliferation efforts.

The United Nations was established 60 years ago

to bring peace and security to the world, and also to

play a major role in promoting development. The

United Nations must not allow, as has appeared to be

the case in recent years, any part of its mandate to be

usurped.

The Bretton Woods institutions and the General

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, now the World Trade

Organization, have taken dominant positions on

policies in areas of their specialization. These policies,

however, have far-ranging implications across the

economic, social and environmental spectrum. There is

a glaring gap in overall international development

policymaking, and in the capacity to secure coherence

across the development, finance, trade and technology

areas.

With renewed priority to development and the

Millennium Development Goals, United Nations

reform should empower the Organization by providing

the resources and a clear mandate to do at least three

things. First, it should ensure system-wide coherence,

including with the Bretton Woods institutions and the

WTO, in respect to the policies and operational

activities which impact the achievement of the agreed

development goals. Secondly, it should bring the

resources of the development-oriented arms of the

United Nations system to focus on development

priorities that have been identified by Member States.

And, thirdly, it should promote dialogue and

partnership, review trends, particularly in resource

mobilization, and implement measures to ensure that

the Development Goals can be met within the agreed

time frames. These should be the responsibility of a

revitalized Economic and Social Council.

The future of generations to come rests not so

much on the vigour of our debate and the declarations

at the sixtieth session of the General Assembly, but on

the action we take, commencing right here in New

York, to make the United Nations stronger and more

effective.

All our citizens are demanding that collectively

we emerge with a clear vision, that we display the

courage and unrelenting commitment to build a world

of peace, justice and equity, which we can inhabit

together in true harmony. They are convinced that it is

within our power to rid the only planet where human

life prevails of hunger, ignorance, disease and strife.

They believe we can provide shelter to the homeless

and eradicate poverty everywhere; that once we have

the political will and determination, we can prevent

genocide and combat terrorism; that irrespective of

gender, race, colour or religious creed, we can ensure

for every person the inalienable right of human dignity.

Let us spare no effort to build a single world free

from want and fear, free from exploitation and

oppression: a mother Earth where justice, liberty,

prosperity and the wisdom of creative minds prevail in

abundance. Let us here resolve to build one world in

which every man, woman and child can realize the true

purpose of life and enjoy its fulfilment. Let us

determine that the time for action is now and sound the

trumpet of hope for all mankind.