Sudan, 1992

Allow me, at the

outset, to congratulate Mr. Ganev, on behalf of my delegation, on his election

to the presidency of this important session of the General Assembly, and to

extend to his predecessor, through him, our thanks and appreciation for the

skilful manner in which he conducted the work of the previous session. From

this rostrum, I also extend our sincere congratulations to the States that

have joined the membership of this Organization since the previous session.

We welcome them as a new driving force that contributes to the various efforts

deployed in the international arena with a view to bringing about prosperity,

development, and stability for the peoples and communities of the world.

This session, we have before us an important agenda at all political,

economic, social, humanitarian, and security levels. All of us must be aware

that, today, the world faces a new set of international phenomena that were

not active before the Gulf war and its consequences whose impact is being

increasingly felt on the international arena from one day to the next.

For our part, we recognize that new and different international

circumstances emerge with the dawn of every day. The barrier of the

ideologies which, in the past, immersed the world in conflict, confrontation

and competition for the sake of narrow interests, has collapsed. The

improvement in East-West relations has opened up new vistas. However, the

period of transition we are living through has spawned new contradictory

tendencies, the most conspicuous of which is an intense acerbity in the

relations of the wealthy North and the poor South under the circumstances of

the so-called new world order. On the other hand, unipolarity has led the

world into a new security system controlled by a handful of major Powers in

the complete absence of active participation on the part of the rest of the

international community.

The era of international detente we hear so much about nowadays, is no

more, in our view, than detente between those major Powers with their economic

and military muscle. That detente has yet to address the closing of the wide

gap between North and South, it has yet to reform international economic and

commercial relations and it has yet to address the issues of overriding

concern to the South, such as the debt burden, poverty, illiteracy and

disease. On top of all that, the States of the developing world are being

subjected now to the practices of the so-called new international legality

which means, inter alia, interference and intervention in the internal affairs

of those States and pursuance of the policies of diktat which deprive them of

the right of making their own decisions.

In the tenth summit of the Non-Aligned Movement, which concluded its

meetings in Jakarta a few weeks ago, the Presidents and Heads of Government of

the Movement deliberated over the current international situation and the role

of the Movement therein. They have voiced their conviction that the

Non-Aligned Movement, being the representative of the largest grouping of

States and peoples in the world, has a role to play in the context of the

unipolarity that reigns in the world today and, therefore, should be included

in a flexible mechanism that would aim at a new world balance in which the

developing countries of the world should have an effective role in the

formulation and setting up of a new world order that must replace the rampant

international chaos of today, and put an end to the present marginalization of

international covenants and agreements which must be binding to us all. The

Presidents and Heads of Government of the Non-Aligned Movement have set for

themselves anew the target of ensuring a full presence for the Movement in

addressing all the international issues on the world's agenda. They also have

set the target of becoming genuine partners in all decisions to be taken

particularly within the framework of the United Nations and its Security

Council.

The international mechanism governing relations between States should, in

our opinion, continue to be the United Nations and its agencies. However, in

order for this important Organization fully to discharge its duties, the

following must be achieved.

Full commitment and adherence to the United Nations Charter, which must

be developed in a manner that would be compatible with the changes that have

taken place in the world since it was signed.

The General Assembly must be enabled to play a full role in the

maintenance of peace and security. The General Assembly's role should be as

important as that of the Security Council's.

Selectivity and double standards must be abandoned with respect to the

implementation of the Charter's provisions.

The Security Council'", activities should be characterized by

transparency. The Council should adopt a democratic approach in the area of

decision-making.

The United Nations Secretary-General should be able to play his role

fully,. without diktat from certain States, and should deal with all States on

an equal footing. While appreciating the responsibilities of the

Secretary-General, we are if the opinion that he should have the time to meet

the delegates and representatives of Member States and listen to what they

have to say on issues of importance to their countries and their regions.

The permanent membership of the Security Council and the right of veto

which is the prerogative of the few should be reviewed. It is worth mentioning

in this respect that the veto has been cast 279 times since the inception of

the Security Council, in relation to issues most of which were of special

importance to countries of the developing world.

The new world order being heralded nowadays should not violate the

sovereignty, territorial integrity, or independence of States nor deprive them

of their right to make their own decisions. Preventive diplomacy relating to

the making and maintenance of peace should proceed from a basic principle

aimed, first and foremost, at the complete eradication of regional and

international tension, and at seeking out and uprooting the root causes of

political, social and economic conflicts so that the countries involved may

live in peace and enjoy stability and prosperity.

The type of preventive diplomacy that is accompanied by the use of

military force must not be used against the smaller States alone. It is worth

wondering here how military force can be used against countries which possess

large or medium military capabilities. This is a legitimate question and we,

the smaller States, should look for an answer to it that would meet our urgent

concerns. If preventive diplomacy is to proceed initially from the principle

of fact-finding, such fact-finding should be based on information-gathering

from original sources and should avoid selectivity and hasty conclusions that

could become the justification for specific actions which may well be military

in nature. We in the developing world have suffered a great deal from the

unfair communication of facts on issues concerning our countries, either

through mass media networks or governmental and non-governmental organizations

which may be active in our countries. We hope that the United Nations and its

various agencies, in all cases, will act impartially and not fall prey to

narrow political opportunism.

In the midst of international changes, we in the Sudan are striving to

spread the principles of Shura meaning consultation and participation in

decision-making - and democracy, and to find a peaceful and lasting political

solution to the problem of the southern Sudan. We have so far achieved

considerable progress, at the Abuja talks, which took place in May this year

under the auspices of President Ibrahim Babangida of Nigeria.

We look forward with optimism and hope to the forthcoming second round of

the Abuja talks, which will soon take place. We expect to reach, with the

rebel movement, a final solution to the problem of the south, by the end of

this year. It is our sincere hope that the peace efforts by the Sudan

Government will attract the support and blessings of all friendly and

fraternal States and of the international community as a whole.

Allow me to mention here specifically, an important issue that weighs a

lot on many minds these days, namely the issue of human rights. The

protection and maintenance of human rights is a sacred obligation that all

religions and human laws call for. The causes of instability and problems of

security and peace are directly and organically linked to the maintenance of

these rights, for individuals and for peoples alike. Therefore, it is our

conviction that human rights are linked to the right of individuals and

peoples to dignity, physical and mental health, the freedom to make their own

decisions without diktat, the right to have access to the fruits of scientific

advancement, namely progress and technology, the right to be free from

poverty, disease and hunger and the right to education as well as to material

and psychological stability.

However, we notice that the principles of human rights, just like many

other ideals, are being exploited and misused as a pretext for interference

and intervention in the internal affairs of smaller States. Regardless of the

claims of interference and intervention for the protection of minorities, such

behaviour is, in essence, no more than using the issue of human rights as a

weapon against those countries which do not submit to foreign diktat, and as a

means of shrugging off moral obligations towards the developing countries.

We also notice that while the lofty ideal of human rights is being

wielded as weapon, its use is characterized by a double-standard. The crimes

and violations by allies are ignored, while accusations of human rights

violations are trumped up against those countries that do not surrender their

right to independent decision-making.

We notice too that certain countries have set themselves up as the

self-styled protectors of human rights even though they lack any moral grounds

that may qualify them for such a role. Such States give themselves the right

to dictate norms of human rights according to their own cultures, customs and

social conceptions, and pass judgement on others accordingly.

The promotion of human rights and basic freedoms will be properly

achieved, as envisaged by those who wrote the United Nations Charter, only

through international cooperation and not through confrontation or coercion.

The upholding and implementation of those rights within national frameworks

remain within the jurisdiction and responsibility of each Government

individually so long as that Government properly performs its duties towards

its citizens. It is the right of all peoples to freely establish their own

political and economic systems and institutions on the basis of respect for

the principles of national sovereignty, self-determination and

non-interference in the internal affairs of others.

In this context, reference should be made to the fact that the

fundamental principles of human rights as set out in the Universal Declaration

of Human Rights embody two components that balance out each other: the first

relates to the rights and basic freedoms of the individual, while the second

stipulates duties of the individual towards society and State.

This balance between rights and duties is important, inasmuch as its

absence leads to the negation of the rights of society as a whole and to

instability, especially in developing countries. We agree also with the view

that the political, civil, economic, social and cultural dimensions of human

rights are indivisible, and cannot be selectively denied for contingent

political motives.

At the same time, we reject every attempt to use the human rights issue

as a precondition for the provision of economic and social assistance as this

leads to the marginalization of such rights on the economic, social and

cultural levels. We emphasize that development and human rights are

concomitant and interdependent. Hence the need for cooperation and

multilateral assistance in the implementation of social and economic

development programmes in the developing countries on the basis of the fact

that the right to development is a valid, legitimate right that constitutes an

indivisible part of fundamental human rights. We hope that the World

Conference on Human Rights that will be held next year will deal

comprehensively with the issue in all its aspects.

Another important issue that requires urgent attention is the situation

in Somalia. The people of this sister country are victims of a bitter civil

They have suffered its ravages. Since the convening of the minisummit of

the States of the Horn of Africa on humanitarian issues, those States have

performed and continue to perform their duty in searching for a peaceful

solution to the differences between the warring factions in the dispute in

Somalia.

We look forward to the support of the international community for that

role in order for it to achieve the goals spelled out at the Bahr Dar

meeting. We had expected the international community to recognize that role

and develop it, as stability in the region is important, especially to its

countries and for the welfare of its peoples which cannot be ensured without

this desired stability.

However, what happened instead was that a decision to send international

forces to Somalia was taken, and the numbers of those forces have started to

increase from one day to the next. It was our opinion that such forces should

have been composed of contingents from the countries of the region itself,

because we are worried that some countries from outside the region may pursue

their own interests there by supporting one faction or another against the

others and thereby enabling it to win the war. Stability in Somalia cannot be

achieved without comprehensive national reconciliation; one faction cannot

have sole power, and we hope that the faction of Mr. Ali Mahdi will come to

realize this fact.

Several tragic multifaceted situations continue to beset the world such

as the refugee problems and the plight of displaced and homeless persons.

These problems are clearly manifest in Africa and the Middle East.

The Palestinian people continue to struggle and strive for the

establishment of their own independent State on their own soil at a time when

bilateral and multilateral negotiations are being obstructed by procedural

hurdles that have held back those talks and prevented the negotiators from

addressing the substance of the conflict. The new Israeli Government has not

yet proved its serious intent or demonstrated the political will to restore

the rights of the Palestinian people and consequently restore peace and

security to this sensitive region of the world. We consider that the

convening of an international conference on the Palestinian question under

full United Nations supervision is the only viable alternative.

We further believe that the attempts being made with the aim of

fragmenting the territorial integrity of Iraq are negative acts and examples

of the unjust improper application of international norms. Moreover, those

attempts will eventually jeopardize the balance of power in the region, ensure

absolute Israeli hegemony and open wide the doors to Israel's belligerent and

expansionist intentions which aim at ingathering all the Jews of the world in

a greater Israel.

Another human tragedy that needs close attention is the question of the

Muslim people of Bosnia and Herzegovina who are being subjected to genocide

and liquidation under the very noses of those who call for the preservation of

human rights and the protection of minorities. This situation, in our view,

is the result of ancient and anachronistic ethnic and religious hatreds which

should have disappeared by now. All countries agree that the massacres,

genocide, detentions and summary executions that are taking place there have

no precedent other than what took place in the days of the Second World War.

While the changes that swept over the countries of Eastern Europe have

resulted in the emergence of new republics, we would have hoped that, in due

course, those republics were going to join the world community of independent

States and ensure the enjoyment to the full, by a'l their peoples, of

religious and cultural freedoms.

The appeasement of a belligerent majority is a clear case of bias in

favour of the creed and cultural affiliations of that majority as opposed to

the Islamic faith of a considerable number of the peoples of Bosnia and

Herzegovina. The actual handling of this issue has been flawed by the

selectivity of the major Powers, especially the five permanent members of the

Security Council. It is definitely short-sighted to deal with the problem

only from a limited humanitarian perspective. What the people of Bosnia and

Herzegovina need above all is the preservation of their identity side by side

with freedom and protection from acts of displacement and extermination. We

therefore consider that the resolutions of the Security Council on this issue

are inadequate because they do not address the issue in its wider political

and ethical context. Proceeding from this view, the Islamic Group has

condemned Security Council resolution 770 (1992).

In our opinion, complete military intervention by the United Nations is

the only viable solution. If this does not take place, our nagging doubts

that there is a scheme to erase the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina from

the map of Europe will only grow. In addition, the policy of depriving the

people of Bosnia and Herzegovina of the means to defend their very existence

while the Serbian aggressors continue to receive arms without any interference

from the United Nations, will cast strong doubts on the integrity and

neutrality of the international Organization.

Recently, a minor crisis has flared up between the two sisterly States of

Iran and the United, Arab Emirates over certain disputed islands. We are

disturbed by the fact that that dispute has been transferred from the

bilateral context to regional and international forums. This will only

exacerbate the conflict. The parties that are now engaged in promoting the

escalation of that dispute especially in the mass media, are trying, in fact,

to aggravate tensions in the Gulf region, which has suffered the unfortunate

effects of the sad events that have swept over it during the past few years.

We urge most strongly the containment of this dispute which should be

addressed at the bilateral level in line with the operation of the old

mechanism that was agreed upon in 1971 between the two parties.

The Persian Gulf area has suffered a series of wars that have obstructed

its development. The present agonies of the people of Iraq under the

conditions of an unjust economic blockade and the unending attempts to

fragment their country's territorial integrity have resulted from disputes

which, in our view, should have been settled by peaceful means within the

regional framework, in order to prevent foreign interests from infiltrating

the region and capitalizing on differences and disputes to serve their own

strategic and economic designs.

The international economic situation remains static. Indeed, its

principal feature continues to be the unending deterioration of the economies

of the countries of the South and the widening gap between those countries and

the industrial countries. The major cause of that deterioration lies in the

negative and dangerous effects on international trade of the drop in exports

of the developing countries as a result of the deterioration of prices of

their primary commodity exports to the industrial countries.

The horrendous negative effects of the debt crisis have been aggravated

to the point where they not only threaten the prospects of economic and social

development of the developing countries but also the very existence of those

countries.

It is important at this point to mention the failure of the industrial

countries to honour their commitments, as embodied in international treaties

and strategies pertaining to the flow of development assistance to the

developing countries, and particularly in implementing the resolutions

embodied in the the international strategy for the decade of the 1980s, which

called for allocating 0.7% of their gross national income to official

assistance to the developing countries. Instead of implementing those

resolutions, the developed countries have blocked every attempt to adopt a new

strategy for the decade of the 1990s. Furthermore, the industrial countries

have failed to implement the programme for the 1990s, which was adopted in

favour of the least developed countries in the 1990 Paris Conference. This.

failure has caused a grave setback to the economic and social development of

the least developed countries.

Africa, with its feeble infrastructures, is the continent that has been

most affected by that imbalance in the world economic situation. It is the

continent that suffers most, because of the considerably diminished flow of

economic assistance and investment and the imposition on its countries of

unjust conditions that are not imposed upon the other groupings of the

developing world. Moreover, the attempts to destabilize some regions of the

continent aim, in our view.- at creating a geopolitical climate that would be

compatible with the strategies of certain major Powers. We all know the

potentials of Africa, a continent with a great wealth of untapped human and

natural resources.

The real challenge that now faces the international community is

narrowing of the ever-widening gap between the wealthy countries of the North

and the poor countries of the South. It is that gap which is the real threat

to world peace and security. The debt crisis is one of the products of the

present international economic order. It is a phenomenon that resulted.

essentially, from the structural imbalance of that order, and its failure to

generate an appropriate developmental climate.

We have an unshakable belief in the necessary collective interdependency

and the organic interrelatedness of the international economic order, if it is

to be an order whose aim is to mutually benefit all mankind. This cannot be

the case, however, unless comprehensive and integrated solutions are found to

the existing problems on the basis of equality, justice and interdependency.

The dialogue required for the achievement of that objective cannot take place

without the political will, courage, wisdom and far-sightedness of all

concerned.

In conclusion, we should like to express our absolute conviction

regarding the necessity of collective action in the current period of detente

in international relations. That means, in our view, developing the

activities of all the organs of the United Nations and giving those organs the

required importance. In order to reach that objective, we need to cooperate

and work together, hand in hand.

May Allah lead us to our noble objectives and grant us the vision to see

them clearly.