Pakistan, 1999

Mr.President, it is an honour to

address the General Assembly at this session, the last to be

held in the twentieth century.

May I begin by welcoming the Republic of Kiribati,

the Republic of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga to the

family of the United Nations. We look forward to working

closely with the new Members.

The twentieth century has been described as the age of

extremes. In this century, human civilization made quantum

strides in progress and prosperity. We discovered the ocean

depths, travelled into the outer space and landed on the

moon. We have witnessed the technological and

information revolutions transforming the wide world into a

global village.

The twentieth century has also been a violent and

tragic century. Millions died in the two world wars and

hundreds of other conflicts. Millions perished as a result

of poverty and disease.

This session of the Assembly offers an opportunity

to identify the major global challenges which humankind

is likely to confront in the next century. The United

Nations should therefore devote the next year to evolving

ways and means to address these challenges and to

promoting an agreed approach next year at the

Millennium Assembly.

Peace remains the foremost challenge of our times.

The end of the cold war and the triumph of the principles

of democracy and free markets created hope for the dawn

of universal peace. This, unfortunately, turned out to be

elusive. Instead, conflicts have continued to ravage the

world.

Long-suppressed national aspirations, as well as

frustration with continuing inequity and deprivation, have

led to widespread violence and wars, between and within

States. The several conflicts afflicting Africa, the Balkans

and the Caucasus, as well as Palestine, Kashmir and

Afghanistan, are painful reminders of the ascendance of

war and the absence of peace.

The United Nations, under the wise leadership of

Secretary-General Kofi Annan, has endeavoured to cope

with these conflicts and crises. Unilateral approaches,

accompanying the centralization of global influence, have

not always ensured just and durable solutions to complex

problems rooted in history, religion, politics and

economics in various parts of the world.

In the final and decisive confrontation of the cold

war, 1.5 million Afghans were killed, a million were

maimed, and a whole country was destroyed. Ten years

after the foreign intervention ended, almost 3 million

Afghan refugees are still in Pakistan and Iran. With no

reconstruction and no development in that poor country,

the new generation knows nothing but war. Rehabilitation

and reconstruction are the right of the valiant Afghan

people. Economic development, accompanied by

education and modernization, is the best way to end

violence, promote human rights and improve social

conditions in Afghanistan.

Peace in Afghanistan is vital for Pakistan. Turmoil

in Afghanistan creates turbulence on our frontier. The

preservation of Afghanistan’s territorial integrity is pivotal

28

for peace and stability throughout Central Asia. Peace in

Afghanistan will open vast opportunities for commerce and

economic interaction between Central Asia and South Asia

and beyond.

Pakistan has persisted in promoting peace and

reconciliation in Afghanistan. We support the efforts of the

United Nations as well as the “six plus two” process.

Pakistan is constantly endeavouring to bring about an end

to the fighting and promote reconciliation and political

accommodation between the Taliban Government and the

Northern Alliance.

The world has welcomed the resumption of the peace

process in the Middle East. We earnestly hope that it will

proceed smoothly to culminate in the establishment of a just

and durable peace based on the fundamental rights of the

Palestinian people, including their right to their own State,

and the withdrawal of Israel from the Syrian Golan Heights

and southern Lebanon.

We are glad that the tension between morality and

legality has been overcome in Kosovo. We are happy the

Kosovar refugees have returned home. Yet Kosovo’s

travails are not over. Pakistan will continue to support the

efforts of the United Nations for peace in the Balkans.

In East Timor, we trust that the human tragedy has

ended, even as the United Nations peacekeepers arrive

there. I wish to pay tribute to Secretary-General Kofi

Annan and my compatriot, Ambassador Jamsheed Marker,

who were greatly challenged in the process of fostering

freedom in East Timor while safeguarding stability.

We have learned valuable lessons from Kosovo and

East Timor: a people’s aspiration for freedom cannot be

suppressed indefinitely; a free exercise of the right of

self-determination is indispensable for peace; self-

determination can be best exercised in an environment free

of fear and coercion; and the United Nations is best placed

to oversee the exercise of self-determination.

These conclusions were already accepted for Kashmir

50 years ago. The Security Council decided that the final

disposition of the disputed State of Kashmir should be

determined by its people, in a free and impartial plebiscite

held under United Nations auspices. India resiled from its

acceptance of this agreement and from its own pledge to

allow the Kashmiri people to decide their own future. On

one pretext or another, it refused to implement the

provisions of Security Council resolutions.

India's repression in Jammu and Kashmir has killed

thousands of Kashmiris, forced hundreds of thousands

into exile, led to three wars between Pakistan and India

and consigned the two countries to a relationship of

endemic conflict and mistrust. Pakistan and India can and

must overcome this unfortunate legacy.

To this end, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, soon after

assuming office two and a half years ago, proposed the

initiation of a comprehensive, structured and sustained

dialogue between Pakistan and India to address Kashmir,

peace and security and other outstanding issues. India

agreed, after one year, to a dialogue on Kashmir. To

provide political momentum to the bilateral dialogue,

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif invited Prime Minister

Vajpayee to visit Pakistan.

At the Lahore summit, India and Pakistan committed

themselves to intensify their efforts to resolve Kashmir,

build mutual confidence and peace and pave the way for

broader cooperation. In Lahore, the Pakistan Prime

Minister urged his Indian counterpart to ease the

repression in Kashmir. He cautioned that without progress

on Kashmir political dynamics could compromise the

good intentions reflected in the Lahore Declaration. But

India displayed no desire to genuinely address, let alone

resolve, the Kashmir issue. Its cruel repression of the

Kashmiri people continued unabated.

The Kargil crisis was a manifestation of the deeper

malaise spawned by the unresolved Kashmir problem and

India's escalating repression of the Kashmiri people. India

launched a massive military operation in Kargil and

threatened a wider conflict by mobilizing its armed forces

all along the Pakistan-India international border. Pakistan

acted with restraint. We believed that war between two

nuclear-armed neighbours must be avoided. We offered

immediate de-escalation and negotiations to address

problems along the Line of Control, including India's

violation of this Line and occupation of Chorbatla,

Siachen and Qamar. Pakistan's efforts led to the

disengagement by the Kashmiri freedom fighters from the

Kargil heights and offered a renewed opportunity for

negotiation and dialogue.

Pakistan is ready for the resumption of the Lahore

process with India. However, instead of reciprocating

Pakistan's willingness to pursue negotiations, India has

posed preconditions for resuming the talks. The Indian

military deliberately shot down an unarmed Pakistan

naval aircraft on a routine flight within our airspace,

killing 16 of our naval personnel — mostly young

29

trainees — in cold blood and without any warning. India is

also continuing hostilities along the Line of Control and has

repeatedly launched attacks across the Line in several

sectors.

Kashmir is not a dispute over land. It is about the

destiny of a people; it is about implementation of the

resolutions of the Security Council; it is about respect for

the fundamental rights of the Kashmiri people, especially

their right to self-determination. The complete boycott by

the Kashmiris of the sham elections in Kashmir organized

by India earlier this month is clear testimony of their total

alienation from India. No settlement can be durable if it is

contrary to their wishes.

The Kashmir issue cannot be frozen while its people

are determined to secure their freedom; while the blood of

Kashmiri martyrs is being shed by the bullets and bayonets

of the 700,000-strong Indian occupation force. Human

rights must be upheld not only in Kosovo and Timor, but

also in Kashmir. To make progress towards a settlement,

the world must demand that India take immediate steps to

halt its repression of the Kashmiri people.

For this purpose, India must: first, stop the cruel

crackdowns against Kashmiri villages and urban areas;

second, release the thousands of Kashmiris held in

detention centres and jails; third, remove military pickets

and troops stationed in Kashmiri towns and villages; fourth,

allow the presence of international human rights

organizations in Kashmir; fifth, agree to the stationing of

impartial human rights monitors in Jammu and Kashmir;

sixth, entrust the International Committee of the Red Cross

(ICRC) with a larger role in Kashmir, including the

provision of relief and help to the thousands of Kashmiri

widows and orphans; and, seventh, agree to a progressive

reduction of the 700,000 Indian troops deployed in

Kashmir.

The international community is increasingly conscious

of the imperative for a just resolution of the Jammu and

Kashmir dispute. The risk of a wider conflict cannot be

contemplated in a nuclear environment. Kashmir remains on

the Security Council's agenda. The Council's resolutions

remain to be implemented. The promise of self-

determination made by the United Nations to the Kashmiri

people remains to be fulfilled. Therefore, while we will,

hopefully, soon resume bilateral talks with India, Pakistan

would welcome the association of the genuine

representatives of the Kashmiri people with the negotiating

process to promote a solution consistent with the United

Nations Security Council resolutions.

India's ambitions threaten to further propel our

region towards a dangerous nuclear and conventional

arms race. For decades — even after India's first nuclear

explosion in 1974 — Pakistan sought to exclude nuclear

weapons from South Asia. Ironically, the advocates of

non-proliferation imposed discriminatory restrictions

against Pakistan while ignoring India's steady

development of nuclear and missile capabilities. Last May

India put the final nail in the coffin of South Asian non-

proliferation when it conducted five nuclear tests and

declared itself a nuclear-weapon State. Its leaders then

proceeded to threaten Pakistan. Confronted by an

aggressive nuclear India, Pakistan was obliged to

demonstrate its nuclear capability and thus restore nuclear

deterrence and strategic balance in South Asia. The

response of the major Powers, to penalize not only the

offender but also the victim, was patently unfair.

Even after our tests, Pakistan proposed nuclear

restraint to India, consistent with our conviction that

nuclear deterrence can and should be maintained between

Pakistan and India at the lowest possible level. In our

separate dialogues with the United States and India, we

proposed a strategic restraint regime outlining specific

measures for nuclear restraint and stabilization,

conventional arms balance and the resolution of

outstanding disputes. Hopes for restraint have been

shattered by the announcement of India's nuclear doctrine,

setting out plans to acquire and operationally deploy a

huge arsenal of land-, air- and sea-based nuclear weapons

and to further build up its conventional forces, almost all

of which are deployed against Pakistan. Even the Indian

offer of non-first use of nuclear weapons is designed to

gain it acceptance as a nuclear-weapon State and to

justify the acquisition of a massive nuclear arsenal as a

second-strike capability.

India's pursuit of this doctrine will destabilize South

Asia. Pakistan will be compelled to enhance its nuclear

and missile capabilities and operational readiness to

preserve deterrence. India must test again to develop

warheads for its missiles. This would subvert the

Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). India's

quest for its large nuclear arsenal could jeopardize

prospects for the conclusion of a fissile material cut-off

treaty. India's ambitions threaten peace and stability not

only in South Asia, but also in adjacent regions, including

the Gulf and the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean.

The international community must act — and it must

act immediately — if it is to avoid a hair-trigger security

environment in South Asia, with grave implications for

30

global peace, security and disarmament. To this end, the

Assembly should endorse the concept of strategic restraint

in South Asia.

For this purpose, it should urge India to do the

following.

First, India should disavow the proposed nuclear

doctrine. Secondly, it should refrain from any further

nuclear tests and adhere to the CTBT. For its part, Pakistan

remains committed to adhering to the CTBT in an

atmosphere free of coercion. Thirdly, it should undertake

not to operationally deploy nuclear weapons on land, air or

sea. Fourthly, it should open negotiations with Pakistan for

an agreement to achieve balance in fissile material stocks,

while both India and Pakistan participate in the fissile

material treaty negotiations, expected to commence early

next year in Geneva. Fifthly, India should eschew the

acquisition of anti-ballistic missile systems and any

military-related capabilities in space; and sixthly, cut back

drastically on its plans to purchase and develop various

advanced and destabilizing conventional weapons systems.

In this context, Pakistan appeals to those countries which

intend to supply these conventional weapons to India to

reconsider their policies.

Pakistan believes that it is now essential to convene a

conference, with the participation of all the permanent

members of the Security Council and other interested

Powers, as well as Pakistan and India, to promote the goals

of strategic restraint and stability in South Asia.

The threat of nuclear war does not emanate only from

South Asia. Although the strategic confrontation of the cold

war is over, the major nuclear Powers, even while pressing

for non-proliferation by others, have asserted their own

right to possess nuclear weapons indefinitely. The

implementation of strategic arms reduction agreements is

stalled. If the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty is

rescinded or revised, and missile defence plans are

implemented, the nuclear-arms race may well be revived

among the nuclear-weapon States. And heightened tensions

among them, over new or old disputes, could once again

move the nuclear doomsday clock closer to midnight.

Pakistan supports the endeavours to achieve nuclear

disarmament and the early elimination of all nuclear

weapons. Multilateral negotiations can evolve agreed plans

to realize these vital objectives. We also support the call for

preserving the ABM Treaty and avoiding the development

and deployment of anti-ballistic missile systems.

Negotiations to prevent the further militarization of outer

space should be initiated forthwith in the Geneva

Conference on Disarmament.

In a globalized yet divided world, with modern

weaponry and communications available to almost

everyone, terrorism has emerged as a pervasive challenge

in many parts of the world. It is a complex phenomenon

with many manifestations, a lethal tool used by ruthless

individuals, groups and States.

Pakistan condemns terrorism in all its forms and

manifestations, wherever it occurs. For a decade, during

the Afghan war, Pakistan was the single largest target of

terrorism from across our borders. Even today, our

adversaries foment fear in Pakistani cities by sponsoring

and financing terrorist bomb blasts and random violence.

Our eastern neighbour has mastered the black art of state

terrorism in Kashmir, utilizing the tactics of crack-downs,

custodial killings, disappearances, arson, torture and rape,

as tools of repression against the Kashmiri people's

struggle for freedom and self-determination. It is with

good reason that the non-aligned countries have

denounced the repression of peoples under foreign

occupation as the worst form of terrorism.

Pakistan condemns the reprehensible tendency in

certain quarters to link manifestations of terrorism with

Islam. We welcome the resolution adopted earlier this

year by the Commission on Human Rights which

denounced attempts, including in the media, to defame

Islam and link it with terrorism.

Free markets and free political systems, accompanied

by breath-taking technological advances, are rapidly

integrating our world across frontiers and continents.

Unfortunately, most developing countries have been

bypassed by the benefits of globalization. Income

inequality has increased among and within countries. And,

as the Asian financial crisis showed, growth has often

been fragile.

Market forces alone will not yield an equitable

economic outcome for all peoples. At the tenth United

Nations Conference on Trade and Development

(UNCTAD X) and other international conferences, we

need to rethink current development strategies and

formulate new approaches for broad-based development,

guided by the need for economic equity for individuals

and nations.

Action is required in three main areas. First, in the

area of trade, we need a truly level playing field to

31

encourage greater balance in the benefits of a rules-based

multilateral trading system for the developing countries.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial

Conference in Seattle can advance this goal by resolving

problems involved in the implementation of the Uruguay

Round agreements on textiles and agriculture and

addressing priority issues for developing countries in future

negotiations — not by insisting on premature liberalization

in sectors where they are unable to compete. In Seattle, we

must also oppose the forces of protectionism disguised as

movements to promote environmental and social standards.

Secondly, in the financial area, we need a more stable

financial order which can control the volatility of capital

flows, make available adequate liquidity, especially for the

developing countries, alleviate their debt burden, and ensure

coherence between global financial and trade policies. The

high level “event” on financing for development could help

to build agreement on these issues.

Thirdly, technology: in an increasingly knowledge-

based global economy, the technology and knowledge gap

between the developed and developing countries must be

rapidly narrowed. To this end, it would be useful to evolve

global principles and guidelines for access to and transfer

of technology.

In our globalizing yet fractured world, marked by stark

contrasts between prosperity and poverty, between

tranquillity and turbulence, the hopes of hundreds of

millions of people lie in the United Nations, the most

universal global institution. The United Nations must play

its role, as prescribed in the Charter, as the centre for the

harmonization of the policies of Member States and as the

central instrument for collective security. The Security

Council's procedures must be made more transparent and

democratic, to reflect the collective will and views of all

States Members of the United Nations.

The Assembly must also agree on the objectives and

principles and the approaches and instruments which will

enable the international community to respond to the

emerging challenges posed by conflicts, arms proliferation

and unequal globalization. It is here, at the United Nations,

that we must seek consistent respect for the principles and

purposes of the United Nations Charter, and respect for its

binding decisions. Only thus can we realize the vision of

peace and prosperity for all peoples in a global environment

of freedom and democracy.