Libya, 1995

It is a pleasure for me to

congratulate you on your election to the presidency of the

fiftieth session of the General Assembly. Your unanimous

election to this lofty post is a tribute paid by the

international community to your country and to you

personally. It also bespeaks recognition of your abilities and

skills. To your predecessor, Mr. Amara Essy, the president

of the forty-ninth session, who demonstrated great

dedication and a high level of efficiency, we should like to

extend our deep appreciation for his efforts and skill.

On this occasion, I cannot fail to express my

delegation’s appreciation to the Secretary-General of our

Organization, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for his tireless

efforts to enhance the United Nations and increase its

effectiveness. Through his “Supplement to An Agenda for

Peace'”, he has demonstrated once again high initiative in

seeking to enable the United Nations to rise to the

challenges of today’s highly complex world.

This session of the General Assembly convenes on an

important occasion. In a few days, celebrations will

commence to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the

founding of the United Nations with the aim of sparing

humanity the repetition of the suffering it had endured as a

result of two world wars. This historical occasion, which

marks the end of the post-war era with all its ramifications,

affords us an opportunity to take stock, while we celebrate,

of the Organization’s progress over the past five decades,

to evaluate its performance, and to seek the ways and

means whereby it could overcome the negatives that in

the past prevented it from achieving its goals. In so doing,

we should put forward plans and programmes of action

that would revitalize the United Nations and enable it to

face up to the challenges of the future and to establish a

better world that would be consonant with principles of

the Charter and the common values and aspirations of all

nations.

Last year, the world witnessed certain encouraging

developments. The efforts deployed to promote

international cooperation in the interests of economic and

social development, to reduce environmental degradation

and to combat the phenomena of poverty, terrorism and

drugs continued apace. The dispute in Mozambique was

settled by peaceful means and peace in Central America

has been consolidated. All these developments and

tendencies give cause for hope. However, we should not

allow ourselves to be overly elated. Civil wars and

regional conflicts continue to wreak havoc and to

undermine security and stability in many parts of the

world. In the post-cold-war world there are many other

challenges, which I shall address presently. Before I do

so, however, I seek your indulgence in allowing me to

turn to another question that is not far-removed from the

present international situation and the way small countries

have come to be treated especially when they adopt

independent policies and positions. I refer here to the

dispute between my country and France, the United

Kingdom, and the United States of America over the Pan

Am flight 103 incident, and the crash of the French UTA

aircraft. This dispute would not have continued for such

a long time had the right approach been adopted and had

there been any acceptance of the call for dialogue and

negotiation in seeking to settle the dispute.

As you know, over several years, and in complete

secrecy, certain bodies that are claimed to be independent

investigated the two incidents. Suddenly and without the

presentation of any evidence, Britain and the United

States of America surprised the world by declaring that

the Pan Am flight 103 incident was the work of two

Libyans nationals. At the same time, France declared that

circumstantial evidence pointed at the involvement of

several Libyans in the attack against UTA flight 772.

Although those who made the allegations did not

corroborate them by any document, testimony or fact, the

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, upon being notified of the

allegations, announced that it was ready to cooperate in

uncovering the facts surrounding the two incidents. I do

not see any need to repeat the measures we have taken in

12

this regard, since I have enumerated them at the past two

sessions of this Assembly. Moreover, we have informed all

Member States of our positions and initiatives, in this

respect, in official documents that have been circulated to

them. However, I should like to remind, briefly, that my

country has condemned terrorism in all its forms, and has

declared its commitment to the implementation of any

action decided upon by the international community to

combat terrorism. My country has also cooperated with the

Government of the United Kingdom. British officials have

themselves voiced satisfaction with Libya’s response.

Contacts have been initiated and are continuing with the

French authorities with a view to determining the

circumstances of the crash of the French aircraft. My

country has spared no effort in searching for a feasible

course of action with regard to the two individuals who

have been suspected of having something to do with the

incident of the American plane. Libyan judicial authorities

started to investigate this case but had to suspend the

investigation because of the refusal of both the United

States and British authorities to submit any documents or

papers in their possession. Despite the fact that the issue of

the trial of the two suspects is determined by the 1971

Montreal Convention, which gives Libya the right to try

them, the refusal by Britain and the United States to abide

by this Convention, to which they are both parties,

prompted Libya to seek other solutions to the issue of the

trial. In this respect, Libya has submitted several proposals,

including one that calls for resorting to the International

Court of Justice, or trying the two suspects before a court

whose venue should be agreed upon by the parties

concerned.

Although the United States and British Governments

have both announced that their allegations have been built

on specific facts and reliable information, the facts that

have come to light over the past three years refute such

assertions. In addition to the statement by the Palestinian

national, Yusuf Sha’aban, before a Lebanese court, there

are the statements of the manager of a Swiss electronics

company which undermine the most important basis for

accusing the two Libyan nationals. The information

published in Tracking the Octopus, a recent work of

investigative journalism, points an accusing finger at other

quarters. Despite all this, Libya continued to cooperate in

seeking to reveal all the facts surrounding the Pan Am

flight 103 incident. Proceeding from this, Libya accepted

the proposal of the League of Arab States, which calls for

trying the two suspected individuals by Scottish judges,

under Scottish law, at the seat of the International Court of

Justice at the Hague.

The many secrets and mysterious dimensions of the

Lockerbie incident which have been uncovered have now

been brought into sharp focus by, inter alia, the television

documentary “The Maltese Double-Cross”, William

Chasey’s book The Lockerbie Cover-Up and Geoff

Simmons’ book “Libya: The Struggle for Survival”. In

addition, several articles on this question have appeared

in various newspapers, including the article published by

The Guardian of London on 29 June 1995. All these

documentary revelations by the media refute the

accusations levelled at the two Libyans, and provide

evidence that the incident was planned by professional

agencies to cover up certain suspect activities. Despite all

this, Libya, which, from the very beginning, declared that

it is most interested in unearthing the truth regarding this

incident, has not retreated from its declared position,

namely that it has no objection whatsoever to the trial of

its two suspected nationals before a court of law.

Libya’s overriding concern in all this is to ensure

that its two nationals get a just, fair and neutral trial, that

would be free from any emotional or media influences

and which would be conducted in accordance with the

rules of international law which Libya has always upheld

and adhered to. The International Court of Justice can

testify to our adherence to and respect for international

law, as has been proven in three cases, the latest being

the judgment by the Court in relation to the territorial

dispute between the Jamahiriya and Chad. Although the

judgment was against our position, Libya, out of respect

for international law, accepted the ruling of the Court and

implemented it in a constructive manner. This confirms

Libya’s respect for international legality, to which one of

the big Powers pays lip service all the time, but does not

apply. It even refuses to resort to the International Court

of Justice because this big Power believes in the law of

force not the force of law.

It is evident that the Governments of the United

States and Britain are not keen on revealing the truth

about the perpetrators of the tragic Lockerbie incident. It

has become abundantly clear that involving Libya in this

incident was a premeditated act that aimed at achieving

certain objectives. Otherwise, why should the two

Governments object to the trial of the two suspected

individuals before the judiciary of a third country or

before the International Court of Justice when this has

been acceptable to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and has

been supported by most members of the international

community, as represented by their regional organizations:

the League of Arab States, the Organization of the

Islamic Conference, the Organization of African Unity,

13

and the Non-Aligned Movement? What prevents the two

Governments from accepting the path of dialogue and

negotiation as stipulated by the Charter of the United

Nations? Why is the Security Council being prevented from

responding to repeated calls and appeals by over two thirds

of the membership of the United Nations on whose behalf

the Security Council is supposed to act? And why the

double standards when it comes to dealing with issues of

international legality? Furthermore, how can a certain major

Power explain the fact that while it claims to be keen on

preserving this legality, its record shows that it has the least

regard for the will of the international community, a fact

that is attested to by that major Power’s continued support

of a certain State and protection of that State from

punishment for its refusal to implement international

resolutions which now total 143, including dozens that have

been adopted by the Security Council?

The rejection by the two Governments, of the United

States and Britain, of all Libyan proposals and of all

regional initiatives proves that they want this crisis to

continue for as long as possible. Evidence of this can be

found in the fact that the more Libya’s positions are

welcomed and the more widespread becomes the call for

lifting the sanctions imposed on the Libyan people, the

more the two Governments hasten to oppose such positions

under the false pretext of Libya’s non-response to the

resolutions of the Council, thus keeping the Libyan people

hostage to unjustified sanctions. As if these countries are

not content with the difficulties and pains suffered by the

Libyan people at the hands of colonialists and fascists —

people who fought on its territory, a war that killed and

displaced hundreds of thousands of its people, and planted

in their farms and under their homes millions of mines that

still explode and injure innocent Libyans. These mines also

hinder Libya’s efforts to combat desertification, protect the

environment, and expand economic and social development.

It even seems that these countries are not content with the

suffering of the Libyan people so far, including the acts of

terrorism to which the Libyan people have been subjected

such as the deliberate downing of a Libyan civilian plane

by Israeli military aircraft in 1973, which killed all its 108

passengers. Also, in 1986, hundreds of American fighters

bombed Libyan cities while their residents were asleep.

This aggression claimed the lives of many people and

resulted in heavy material damage. Later, it was proved that

the pretext used by the United States of America for this

act of aggression was false and baseless. The deep desire to

punish the Libyan people also became clear when these

countries insisted on depriving its civilian aircraft of

necessary spare parts. In 1992, this led to the crash of one

of those aircraft and the death of all its 157 passengers.

All this begs the question: is it a desire to discover

the truth, or is it a desire, a thirst to wreak revenge on

Libya because of the defeat of the United States fleet in

1805? So, where is the truth? Is it the thirst for revenge,

a vendetta waged by a major Power against a small

country, a vendetta that goes back 150 years?

The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya has sought a speedy

and just solution to the dispute with France, Britain and

the United States of America. All Libya asked was that

the problem should be settled in accordance with the

principles of the United Nations and the rules of

international law. For this purpose, we have knocked on

many doors, but our efforts, and those of others, to solve

the dispute and to lift the sanctions have faced continued

rejection. Furthermore, there are hints that other measures

may be adopted to tighten the sanctions against us under

the pretext that Libya has not responded to the demands

of the Security Council. This is not true. It merely

represents manipulation and trickery with regard to the

interpretation of those resolutions.

Now that I have reviewed this crisis for the fourth

time before the General Assembly and in order to avoid

any further ramifications, we believe it is now incumbent

upon this august assembly to intervene and to act in

accordance with the powers entrusted to it by the Charter

in order to get the three countries to respond to the

repeated calls for an urgent and peaceful solution to this

problem, in accordance with Chapter VI of the Charter of

the United Nations. This assembly should also urge the

Security Council to reconsider its resolutions in order to

lift the sanctions. Resorting to sanctions is not the proper

way to solve differences between States, especially when

such sanctions are unjustifiably imposed, as is the case

with the sanctions imposed against the Libyan people.

These sanctions have led to the freezing of Libya’s assets,

and prevented it from getting spare parts, including the

parts needed for power plants and desalination machines.

This in turn has hampered the Libyan people’s efforts

with regard to development, and paralysed the activities

of most economic sectors. The more serious aspect of the

effects of these sanctions is the enormity of the material

and human losses which I need not review here in detail,

since we have detailed them in several official documents,

the latest of which is United Nations document

S/1995/474 dated 12 June 1995. Suffice it to mention here

that the number of people injured in road accidents has

reached 12,700 of whom 1,870 have died of their injuries

while others continue to suffer from permanent injuries.

Material damage has exceeded ten billion dollars.

Moreover, the adverse effects of the sanctions have not

14

been limited to the Libyan people. They have affected

neighbouring countries and all the peoples of the region.

Here, I must repeat that the longer these sanctions continue,

the more people will die and the greater the suffering and

the damage. There is no reason whatsoever for remaining

silent on the subject of injustice and the continuation of this

wrong. For the Assembly’s information a road accident

which took place two days ago on the road from Tripoli to

Tunis resulted in the death of three members of a Maltese

delegation.

As I have previously stated, the international political

situation has witnessed new positive developments which

my country welcomes. However, we must recognize that

numerous challenges still face peace in the world and that,

consequently, the international community is called upon to

mobilize all its capabilities in facing up to those challenges.

The continued deterioration of the situation in Somalia

and the intensification of tensions in that country require

more regional efforts to persuade Somali leaders to enter

into additional political commitments and to work for the

restoration of peace and permanent stability to their

country. Seeking to make the world more secure and more

stable requires supporting national reconciliation efforts in

Afghanistan, promoting a satisfactory solution to the

problem of Cyprus, solving the problems in Rwanda and

Burundi and settling the disputes in Angola and Liberia. It

also requires putting an end to the repeated setbacks to

peace efforts in the Balkans, as well as sparing the people

of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and other peoples of the former

Yugoslavia, more pain and suffering.

In order to establish permanent stability in the Gulf

region, the unity and territorial integrity of Iraq must be

respected, and all interference in its internal affairs must

cease. Furthermore, the sanctions from which the Iraqi

people have been suffering should be lifted.

In the context of any effort to consolidate world peace,

serious action must be taken to resolve the problems of the

Middle East. It is unacceptable that the Palestinian people

should continue to be displaced from their land, while those

who stay on that land are brutally treated. The

overwhelming majority of the international community,

which has continued to support the legitimate rights of the

Palestinian people over the past four decades, should take

firm action to put an end to the Israeli practices against the

Palestinians and the other inhabitants of the occupied Arab

territories in the Golan and southern Lebanon. The Israelis

must be deterred, in accordance with the Charter of the

United Nations, from their continued defiance of the will of

the international community. The incontrovertible truth is

that occupation and expansion are the real aim of the

Israelis. Their former and present positions and practices

indicate that they do not want a just and comprehensive

peace. Their joining the so-called peace process is a mere

smoke-screen, a mask they hide behind in order to

perpetrate further occupation and enhance their

superiority.

A just, comprehensive and lasting solution to the

problems of the Middle East cannot be achieved by

ceding the administration of local affairs in Gaza and

Jericho, but rather by the liberation of all occupied Arab

territories and the full enforcement of all the rights of the

Palestinian people — first and foremost being their return

to their homeland, self-determination, and the

establishment of their own independent state in Palestine,

with Al-Quds as its capital, a state where Arabs and Jews

alike would live together. There is no alternative to this

solution. The solutions being put forward these days,

regardless of all the talk about how desirable their results

would be, will not lead to the results aspired to by the

Palestinians, simply because those solutions are unrealistic

and ignore the facts of history.

The continued existence of nuclear weapons and the

increased stockpiling of these and other weapons of mass

destruction are among the principal concerns of the

international community. When the first review

Conference of the States parties to the Non-Proliferation

Treaty (NPT) was held in the first half of this year, it was

hoped that that Conference would lead to satisfactory

results. However, what actually happened was that certain

nuclear Powers brought to bear unprecedented pressures

that made it possible for the NPT to be extended

indefinitely. My country declared its opposition to this

extension, and we remain convinced that extending the

Treaty in that manner would never serve the objective of

nuclear-weapon disarmament.

The NPT has not achieved universality, and its many

shortcomings have not been properly addressed. In our

view, ridding the world of nuclear terror will not be

achieved through gains obtained by manoeuvres and

unconventional measures, but rather through serious

measures, which must be taken by the nuclear States. In

this context, the procurement of nuclear materials must be

ended, and nuclear States must commit themselves to a

deadline for the complete elimination of all nuclear

weapons. These States should put an end to nuclear tests

and conclude, at the earliest possible time, a

comprehensive test-ban treaty. Furthermore, the nuclear

15

States should demonstrate the political will required to

conclude an effective treaty guaranteeing the security and

safety of non-nuclear States.

Another situation that requires speedy corrective action

involves the unjustified restriction on the transfer to

non-nuclear States of nuclear technology for peaceful

purposes. Above all, measures should be taken to guarantee

the universality of the NPT. My country attaches the

greatest importance to this issue, because the region to

which we belong suffers from a security imbalance, owing

to the Israelis’ tremendous nuclear capability — they have

more than 200 nuclear warheads and nuclear facilities that

are not subjected to international inspection. This represents

a threat to the security and safety of the peoples of the

region. No one should keep silent about a situation of this

kind or accept the extension of the NPT as long as such a

situation continues.

If the indefinite extension of the NPT is to be with the

complete support of all, international action must be taken

to meet all these widely expressed requirements and to

guarantee accession by all to the Treaty, including, in

particular, the Israelis, who must agree to subject their

nuclear facilities to the safeguards regime of the

International Atomic Energy Agency, as well as fixing a

timetable for the dismantling and destruction of their

nuclear stockpiles.

In reviewing the international economic situation, it

becomes clear that the economic development of most

developing countries, especially in Africa, is still sluggish

and subject to fluctuations and imbalances. The present

indicators give the impression that this situation is likely to

deteriorate further unless effective measures are taken to

reverse it. The fact is that the economic difficulties of the

developing countries are not the result of a lack of

legislation or plans. For example, Africa has adopted plans

and strategies to promote development and has concluded

a treaty that aims at economic integration. However, the

problem lies in the unjust criteria still prevalent in

international economic relations. These require realistic and

responsible solutions without the imposition of politically

motivated conditions.

The conferences that have been held over the past few

years have created new opportunities to improve the

prevailing economic and social situation. We hope that the

consensus agreements emanating from those conferences

will generate the necessary political will for the

implementation of the resolutions taken by those and other

international forums, including the commitments announced

during the United Nations Conference on Environment

and Development. What is more urgent is the need to

take immediate action to address the external causes of

economic deterioration in developing countries, namely

the increasing tendency towards protectionism, declining

terms of trade, shrinking official development assistance

and restrictions on the transfer of technology.

In addition, it is necessary to deal with unjust

practices in international economic relations such as

coercive economic measures, including boycotts, the

freezing of assets, the confiscation of property and the

prohibition of the export of spare parts, which has been

applied by certain developed countries against a number

of developing countries, including my own. Such

measures not only impede development and run counter

to the Charter of the United Nations, to the resolutions of

the General Assembly and to the orientation towards the

establishment of a system of international economic

relations based on justice and fairness, but also constitute

a violation of the norms of international law. The Western

countries that manufacture the needed spare parts, medical

supplies and water-desalination and power-generating

equipment, by taking such coercive measures, violate their

commitments under free-trade agreements. This should

serve as a warning to whoever deals with those countries,

because there is no guarantee that such measures will not

be applied to them as well.

Last year and the year before, wide-ranging

discussions were held on the restructuring of the United

Nations. These discussions have shown that there is a

need to review and change the procedures and methods of

work of the Security Council so that it may be able to

seriously and fairly address questions that touch on

international peace and security. During the meetings of

the Working Group established by the General Assembly

to look into the question of equitable representation in

and increase in the membership of the Security Council,

as well as into other related matters, my country declared

its support of the call for enhancing the powers of the

General Assembly, including giving it the right to deal

with questions of peace and security in the world, in

conformity with the provisions of the Charter. My country

reiterates its conviction that reforming the Security

Council and increasing its membership should be part and

parcel of an integrate process of reform that must be

guided by the principles of the sovereign equality of

States, equitable geographical distribution and the need to

democratize the procedures and methods applied in the

Security Council, including the process of

decision-making.

16

Libya has been among the first to call for the

elimination of all the obstacles that hamper the work of the

Security Council, particularly, the veto power. Today my

country takes satisfaction in the fact that this call, which

Libya made 20 years ago, now has the support of many

countries. This shows that those countries have now

become convinced that there is no longer any justification

for the power of the veto and that its continued existence

breaches one of the principles of the United Nations,

namely, the equality of States. It is that veto power which

impedes all efforts aimed at the democratization of the

membership and functions of United Nations bodies.

Since becoming a Member of the United Nations, my

country has played an active role in and contributed to

many achievements of which the Organization can be

proud. My country will also contribute to whatever the

Organization seeks to achieve in the future. Based on this,

we have actively participated in the international

Conferences recently organized by the United Nations on

population, social development, human rights, and women.

This we did in the same spirit that inspires our country’s

international activities at other levels. That is why Libya

has participated in all efforts aimed at strengthening the

Arab Maghreb Union. We are proud to see that this Union

has advanced steadily and has taken serious initiatives to

serve the peoples of the Union and to protect their gains.

Libya works with the same determination to adopt effective

measures to enhance cooperation and strengthen confidence

and security in the Mediterranean region in order to remove

the causes of tensions there. This includes our efforts to

close foreign military bases in the Mediterranean region and

to secure the withdrawal of military fleets from its waters.

Proceeding from its positions of principle, Libya has been

at the forefront of the defenders of the aspirations of

peoples, whether in the field of decolonization, the

protection and maintenance of human rights, or the

enhancement of the role principles of justice and fairness

should play in international relations.

Libya has also sought to solve a number of regional

disputes by peaceful means. In this spirit, it has undertaken

several mediation missions including, for example,

assistance in solving the problems in the southern

Philippines and helping to arrest the deterioration of the

dispute between Sudan and Uganda, as well as those

between Nigeria and Cameroon and Greece and Turkey.

Libya has also contributed to efforts aimed at halting the

escalation of the dispute between India and Pakistan, and

has helped in containing events in north Niger and Mali.

In this current session in particular, Libya takes

pride in the fact that these positions have had wide-

ranging effects that were reflected in the trust placed in

my country by Arab States and the group of African

States which unanimously nominated Libya to the

membership of the Security Council for the coming two

years. While expressing its high appreciation of this Arab

and African stand, Libya would like to thank, in advance,

all the countries that will support our candidature for that

seat. We should also like to confirm to everybody that

Libya will support all efforts aimed at the realization of

the purposes of the United Nations and, in cooperation

with members of the Security Council and other members

of the Organization, will work to enhance the role of the

United Nations in the maintenance of international peace

and security, and in closing ranks with other countries in

facing up to the dangers that threaten peace and security

in the world.

At the beginning of this statement, I said that this

session of the General Assembly had a special

significance. This is due to the fact that we believe that

the historical occasion under the aura of which this

session convenes, namely, the celebration of the fiftieth

anniversary of the United Nations, will afford us all an

opportunity that should be seized — an opportunity to

realize peace, security and prosperity for humanity.

In our view, the starting point in this direction lies

in hard work to establish the structure of a new

international order. Such an order, however, should not be

built according to the wishes of the few who seek to

impose their hegemony on others in deciding the fate of

the world, and to dictate their own methods of dealing

with international relations.

The new order that would satisfy us all should be

built on the common aspirations of all. It should be an

order that guarantees full equality to all countries; an

order that must respect the free political, economic and

social choices of all peoples. The new order should

protect and enhance human rights. It should create

conditions conducive to the settlement of disputes and

conflicts and to the resolution of differences among States

by peaceful means. It should be an order which provides

security and stability, and should make it possible for all

nations to aspire after development and to be optimistic

about the future. This new order should embody the noble

concepts and ideals enshrined in the Charter; namely, the

need to unite our strength to save humanity from the

scourge of war, to realize justice, to respect the

obligations arising from treaties and other sources of

17

international law, and to promote better standards of life in

greater freedom.