Kyrgyzstan, 1993

I wish to begin by congratulating the President

and the other officers of the Assembly on their election to

their high, responsible posts and by wishing them every

success in their work, which will certainly yield positive

results for us all.

The end of the twentieth century will go down in

history as the period in which the cold war came to an end

and which saw the dawn of a new world, a period of new

opportunities to do things that only yesterday would have

taken a miracle to achieve. It is enough to recall the historic

agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation

Organization (PLO), the reductions in nuclear and other

weapons of mass destruction, and, for my country,

something that seemed impossible only very recently: the

achievement of the high degree of sovereignty that permits

us to speak from the rostrum of the General Assembly Hall.

I represent a small country that can be viewed as an

oasis of democracy. But that is not strictly accurate: we are

hardly surrounded by an empty wasteland. We are trying to

find our place in a new, complex world. In that quest we

are guided by the following definitions: In the political

sphere, our quest means pluralism, allowing the existence of

varied ideologies and parties that do not espouse violence or

extremism; in the economic sphere, it means a policy

designed to achieve a multi-faceted social market economy,

with equal rights and freedoms for all economic entities; in

the social sphere, it means a policy of self-reliance

protecting the most vulnerable sectors of our population; in

the legal sphere, it means legal safeguards for the interests

of all citizens, economic entities, parties and movements, as

well as for the State; in the area of religion, it means

tolerance and the application of ethical principles; in the

sphere of building the structures of State authority, it means

forming coalition groups with broad participation by officials

from many parties and movements.

The linchpin of our policy is acknowledgement of the

priority of humanitarian values and of the natural right of the

individual to happiness. The new Constitution of

Kyrgyzstan clearly lays down these basic principles, through

which we are attempting, in spite of difficulties, to establish

our chosen State model.

My purpose in this statement is not just to give an idea

of our Republic’s political prospects. I shall try to take a

broader approach to issues; perhaps to some extent this is a

prerequisite for our acknowledgement by the world

community. The process of the victory of democracy in

Kyrgyzstan, and in the other Republics of the former Soviet

Union, seems paradoxical and almost irrational.

Revolutionary changes have taken place at the top levels of

the political elite. These changes were welcomed, as I see

it, primarily because by that time we had already achieved

the democratic victory of glasnost. What happened could be

expressed as follows: the storming of the Bastille was

preceded by The Marriage of Figaro. Our reforms began

not with the economy but with politics. How could it be

otherwise, since Kyrgyzstan had no elements of a market

economy, and property ownership was distorted?

Kyrgyzstan today is one of the few independent States of the

former Soviet Union to have adopted and be carrying out a

programme of economic reforms for transition to a market

economy, as approved by the International Monetary Fund

and the World Bank.

For a number of objective reasons pertaining to the

structure of production and current shortages of energy

sources, such as oil and gas, implementation of

recommendations for our Republic has caused us social and

economic difficulties. Our country has a dire need for

medicines, and a balanced diet is lacking. Thousands and

thousands of young people are coming into the cities from

the villages without any real professional training or any

chance of prospering. Furthermore, we cannot yet give our

economy the necessary impetus to enable us quickly to solve

these and other major social problems. We need investment.

Like other relatively small countries, we need a kind of

Marshall Plan. The experience of many States has shown

that this would be profitable for the wealthy countries and

donors in many ways.

I would not venture to say that, but for my firm

conviction that the ability to empathize with the suffering of

others has always been a strong point of the United Nations;

in fact, it is what has given it its high standing in the eyes

of the world. This is not a case of political parasitism. We

firmly intend to pay off all of our debts, and we fully

recognize that the usefulness of these policies can be

measured only by mutual advantage, and that the results of

any foreign policy activity, including the economic aspects,

depend on the participation of others and the ability to pay,

in the broad sense of the words.

For the world community, for large and small countries,

one thing is becoming more evident: there exists not only

economic power, the power of gold and production, not only

brute military power, but also spiritual power. I am talking

not about the cruel, soulless and heartless fanaticism of some

people, not about trends and faiths whose history is written

in blood, but about lofty and pure ethical values which bind

Forty-eighth session - 7 October l993 17

together people who espouse them. These values and ideals

are the moral postulates of religion.

The President returned to the Chair.

I wish to draw attention to what I regard as a special

topic. We have been witnessing tragic conflicts with

religious roots. One possible solution to this problem would

be to adopt a universal convention on freedom of religion,

which would call upon people of different faiths to apply

ethical and moral principles for the sake of peace and

harmony.

The United Nations is recognized to be a universal

Organization, and as such not to be at variance with other

institutions of the world community. No, it is in those

institutions, in the specialized agencies and regional

organizations, that we find the embodiment of the ideals and

principles of the United Nations. With this in view, I would

like to draw attention to the problem of establishing a

collective security system in Asia. In principle, the

delegation of Kyrgyzstan agrees with what previous speakers

have said in this regard. On the other hand, a collective

security system in Asia cannot be established quickly, or as

quickly as might be hoped. In this connection, no doubt the

best we can do is to ask the Secretary-General to conduct a

study, which could give us useful guidelines for future work

on such an important problem.

Naturally, I have covered only a few issues, against the

backdrop of upheavals in the political and social life of the

world today. But I still hope that I have drawn attention to

major issues of interest to us all.

Every State whose representative has addressed the

Assembly has made recommendations, and further valuable

recommendations and proposals will be made, based on the

high ideals of our Organization, whose focal point should be

the individual and his or her prosperity and happiness. We

fully agree with these proposals and hope that the creative

energy involved will not be self-destructive.