Venezuela, 1982

First of all, Sir, I should like on behalf of the

delegation of Venezuela and on my own behalf to

congratulate you on your well- deserved election

as President for this session of the General

Assembly.

In addition I should like to express our

apprecia¬tion to Mr. Ismat Kittani for the

effective manner in which he carried out his

duties.

I should also like to congratulate Mr. Javier

Perez de Cuellar on his election as the fifth

Secretary- General. His credentials, his personal

qualities and his search for solutions to complex

problems all indicate that his course of action

as head of the Secre¬tariat will be a wise one.

We wish him every success in his major aspiration

to reactivate the political role which it is

within the competence of the Secretary- General

to fulfil.

At the same time it is our duty to transmit to

Mr. Kurt Waldheim our appreciation for the

com¬mendable work he did during the 10 years he

held the post in promoting the United Nations as

an absolutely essential institution which we need

to maintain, develop and strengthen.

The report of the Secretary-General oh the work

of the Organization raises questions of great

importance and dramatic urgency for Member

Staffs. Venezuela wishes to praise the frankness

and direct style reflected in the report and at

the same time to confirm our absolute adherence

6o the Charter and our hope that the political

will of nations will be expressed without

reticence in favour of collective action for

peace and security, as stated in that document.

If, as the Secretary-General states in the

report, we are "perilously near to a new

international anarchy", that is largely due to

the constitutional role of the international

organizations, which has led and leads to

conflicts between national aims and the goals of

the Organization, as is pointed out in the report.

Resort to confrontation, violence and war in the

pursuit of national interests has not

infrequently been encouraged by the historical

practices of powerful States and the growing

scepticism regarding the results of measures

taken by multilateral organizations whose actions

towards peace are halted by the very States which

enjoy privileges within the United Nations.

We believe that the tragic conflict In the South

Atlantic would not have led to such bloodshed if

there had been multilateral action towards peace

and timely attention to the just claims of

peoples which had suffered from the unpunished

aggression of the empires that were all-powerful

in an international order which no longer exists

today.

The States with the greatest relative power in a

world living in conditions of a balance of fear

and the constant risk of a nuclear war can hardly

expect to consolidate their privileges by

considering overall relations among peoples in

terms of their own specific interests. These

privileges in many cases were acquired at the

expense of the dignity and the resources of the

weaker people. As long as justice and respect for

the nations which represent two thirds of all

mankind are not reflected in resolute action by

United Nations organs constant disappointment

will merely foster a phase of absolute cynicism

in international relations,.

The consequences of colonialism and

neo-colonialism have been devastating for peace.

Venezuela maintains that the continent of Latin

America should be a reserve of peace. We share

the feeling of all the fraternal people of our

hemisphere that the elimination of the colonial

strongholds which still exist in our hemisphere

brooks no delay. There is no valid argument for

any European nation to retain territories,

authority or troops in America.

In order "to reinforce the protective and

pre-emptive ring of collective security", as the

Secretary- General urges in his report, we, the

Member States without hegemonistic ambitions,

would like the United Nations machinery to be

respected and imposed upon ail States equally,

for disappointment regarding he effectiveness of

the Organization and the lack of hope of any

future improvement are caused by the belief that

the powerful accept mechanisms and deci¬sions

only when it suits them, and that when it does

not they create obstacles to them or ignore them.

Serious consideration of practical ways for the

United Nations to develop its capabilities and to

be used as a positive institution in the

promotion of the free and peaceful progress of

mankind in our time forms part of the

Secretary-General's plan of action. Venezuela

considers that his report contains coura¬geous

ideas and is prepared to respond constructively

within the possibilities open to it.

My country wishes to point out that the ability

to use properly the means available today to the

Organization to tackle the grave problems which

mankind faces depends decisively on the States

which have the privilege of being permanent

members of the Security Council.

We are convinced that the Assembly will adopt

sensible and just resolutions on the Malvinas,

the Middle East, apart/ten/ and Namibia,

ratifying and strengthening previous resolutions

on those delicate subjects, to mention only some

of the more striking matters referred to in the

Secretary-General's report.

If hope and confidence in the United Nations are

to be restored, ways must be found to make those

resolutions effective, with the full support of

the international community, ways which will make

it possible to overcome the obstacles which

selfishness and injustice are undoubtedly raising

in order to prejudice the harmonious coexistence

of peoples.

The statement made by the President of Venezuela,

Mr. Herrera Campins, at the thirty-sixth session

of the General Assembly had as its motto "Faith

in the United Nations and hope for peace. At

that time he affirmed that "This is an

Organization of peace-loving countries'. In that

spirit it was created, and in that spirit it

should continue. That is the spirit that imbues

Venezuela's foreign policy in all situa¬tions."

Venezuela is attending this most important yearly

exercise of the United Nations at a time when the

Organization's reputation and effectiveness have

been shattered. International crises succeed one

another and continue. One of the problems which

causes most concern is the situation in the

Middle East, which has been exacerbated by recent

events in Lebanon. We are following closely the

tragic events there, realizing that we live in a

world in which important and far- reaching events

cannot be viewed as isolated facts. Violence in

all its forms is rampant in the region. What has

happened in Lebanon has shown the extreme cruelty

to which some will resort

Mass crimes have become a new practice in the

face of which the international community has

found itself unable to act. Today the world is

the victim of an evil game which threatens to

bring it to catastrophe and chaos, in the absence

of effective machinery to enable all States to

live together harmoniously.

Venezuela considers that at this session, more

than any other, because no other session has been

held in the shadow of such painful and complex

circum¬stances, the General Assembly must make an

effective contribution and find a valid solution

which will put an end to war and map out as soon

as possible the road leading to peace. The

escalation of acts of retaliation seems to be

uncontrollable, encouraging and increasing the

use of violence.

As Mr. Herrera Campins said in his speech at the

thirty-sixth session with regard to the Middle

East, "peace cannot be achieved nor kept until

there is a global solution to the conflict

accepted by all the parties involved and until

the legitimate rights of both the Palestinian and

Israeli peoples to live in peace and freedom are

recognized" [%?/<?., para. PR].

In its international conduct, Venezuela has

consistently followed a policy of decolonization.

This attitude is demonstrated by its constant

support for the innumerable resolutions that have

been submitted on the subject. Puerto Rico has

been a special concern of Venezuelans ever since

the beginning of the struggle for the

emancipation of Latin America led by our

Liberator Simon Bolivar. Venezuelans share, with

a deep-rooted feeling, his ideal that Puerto Rico

should be a member of the Latin American family.

We recog¬nize the existence of democratic

freedoms in that sister island, and we expect

that its sovereign future will be an expression

of its people's legitimate right to

self-determination.

The Government of Venezuela recently took a step

of great significance in the Held of

decolonization when it recognized the Democratic

Arab Sahraoui Republic as a sovereign and

independent State, one closely linked to Hispanic

culture.

Venezuela has formally applied for full

member¬ship in the movement of non-aligned

countries. Venezuela shares the fundamental

principles and objectives which brought that

movement into being and recognizes it as a forum

in which the majority of the countries of the

world are represented, thus constituting a force

to promote peaceful coexistence, economic and

social development and the political independence

of its member States.

The twelfth special session of the General

As¬sembly, which was held at United Nations

Head¬quarters this year, ended in virtual failure

because of the Assembly's inability to adopt the

comprehensive programme for disarmament. The

results of the special session should serve as a

lesson for States, particularly nuclear-weapon

States, which bear the greatest responsibility in

this field, and they must redouble their efforts

in the cause of disarmament and see to it that

those efforts are reflected in concrete action in

the Committee concerned.

Venezuela is persevering in its policy of

co¬operation with the countries of Central

America and the Caribbean. Accordingly, the

programmes derived from the San Jose Agreement

remain fully in force. Our commitment to the

institutionalization of freedom and democracy in

the area has been maintained without interruption

and with absolute clarity, as has our rejection

of interference by bloc politics.

We support the effort of the Government of El

Salvador, which bore fruit with the exemplary

civic testimony of the elections held on 28

March. The people of El Salvador went to the

ballot boxes in numbers unprecedented in their

history, bearing witness to their desire for

peace and their repudiation of violence.

Venezuela welcomes the happy out¬come of the

democratic process in Honduras and expresses its

hope that complete normalization will soon become

a reality in Guatemala and in Panama.

We reaffirm our unswerving determination to

co¬operate in the strengthening of peace,

freedom, justice and a pluralist democracy in an

area in turmoil where nothing that happens is

alien to us. In this respect, the President of

Venezuela, the only head of State invited to

attend the celebrations marking the third

anniversary of the Nicaraguan revolution,

recalled on that occasion the international

commit¬ment to respect pluralism that the leaders

of that country had entered into.

The efforts of Venezuela and Mexico with regard

to the tension between Honduras and Nicaragua are

being made in the context of a striving for

peace, freedom and democracy within Latin

American channels without recourse to foreign

action.

Venezuela, like many other developing coun¬tries,

views with profound concern the persistent

deterioration and swift decay of the

international economic situation. Nobody is

unaware of the extreme gravity of those

developments and their inevitable social and

political consequences, which are the most

serious threats to stability, progress and peace

in the world. It is noteworthy that the most

recent analyses of the world economy by

international organizations shows such agreement.

From a broader and universal perspective, the

United Nations itself in the 1981¬1982 economic

survey, when referring to the wide¬spread

stand-still in the world economic expansion,

stated that this "slow-down affected all major

regions and groups of countries, independent of

their level of development or economic structure.

The decel¬eration was particularly intense in the

developing countries".'

Taking a similar view, the report by the UNCTAD

secretariat categorically affirms that "the

developing world is facing the gravest economic

crisis since the Great Depression," and that

"this is the product of the malfunctioning of the

economies of developed market-economy countries,

and has been intensified by the growing disarray

in the trade and financing systems".

For their part, organizations and specialized

agencies such as GATT and IMF confirm those

evalua¬tions. The symptoms of this situation can

be summarized by the following indicators: low

growth rates in production, the collapse of

prices for commodities, the contraction of

international trade, the revival of protectionism

and counter trade practices, monetary and

exchange instability, extensive and sudden

fluctua¬tions in the balances of payments,

extraordinarily high levels of indebtedness and

soaring debt- servicing costs, a pull-back in

productive investments and a flare-up of

financial speculation, alarming and rising

unemployment rates, lowering of expenditures for

social purposes, growing military costs and an

acceleration of the arms race by the great Powers.

The situation I have just described is the result

of contradictory and mistaken economic policies,

as well as of the disorganization and

malfunctioning of the world economy in its three

basic aspects, commercial, financial and

monetary. The increasingly blatant absence of

rules and growing arbitrariness make forecasting

impossible and thus sustain widespread unrest.

Thus, we see how the developed countries, instead

of strongly encouraging the development of

exports by the developing countries by just

remunera¬tion for their commodities, which in the

long run would have led to a healthy expansion of

interna¬tional trade for the benefit of all, have

preferred to finance the imports of the third

world on scandalously exorbitant terms. The

effects of those actions are striking: after a

phase of expansion of international trade, which

was artificially and pathologically sustained, in

large measure, by the rising indebtedness of the

third world, the burden of the corresponding

financial charges is now being turned against the

industrialized countries themselves as a result

of the drastic curtailment of the import capacity

of the developing countries, which virtually

eliminates them as factors promoting

international trade.

The total debt of the developing countries will

be far in excess of the incredible amount of$6P0

billion by the end of 1982. This debt imposes

intolerable burdens on the foreign exchange

earnings of the developing countries and makes

them increasingly insolvent. In Latin America

alone the debt will amount to $280 billion by the

end of this year. The amortiza¬tion of this debt

represents the equivalent of 56 per cent of Latin

American exports. This situation, which in the

context of traditional conditions is now to be

reinforced for strategic purposes, could have

grave political and social consequences.

The situation I have described is an

unpre¬cedented challenge to the international

financial system. The developing countries will

have to make constant efforts to revitalize their

economies, increase their productivity and

improve their efficiency in the management of

financial resources. All this will have to be

done in a way that will be socially and

politically bearable.

The developed world must accept its

responsi¬bilities, not only for the sake of the

principle of justice, but also in its own

interest. Financially, it will be necessary to

preserve the capacity of international

organizations which supply funds on preferential

terms. This implies the need to review

contributions to IMF, the World Bank, the

Inter-American Develop¬ment Bank and similar

institutions so that their resources bear some

relation to the size of existing problems. There

is one fact which cannot be ques-tioned: the

economies of the industrialized countries cannot

be sustained without the support of strong

development in the third world.

The time for major decisions is drawing near and

we cannot afford to let slip any opportunity to

have our voice heard. We, the developing

countries, must reaffirm by our presence and

active participation the importance of forums

such as UNCTAD and must be attentive to what

might happen at the next GATT ministerial meeting.

We have been fighting for a complete

restruc¬turing of the international economy, and

we have denounced the policy of making the

developing coun¬tries bear the brunt of that

readjustment. All this has brought the world

economy to the critical situation in which it

finds itself today. It would be senseless to

expect that the steps the situation calls for

will be taken overnight, just as it has been

senseless to postpone the essential dialogue. An

atmosphere of mutual trust must be established to

contribute to the charting of a new course for

the world economy. This is a pre-condition of the

lessening of international tension and the

building of a more rational and more humane

world, in which harmony, justice and peace will

prevail.

The developing countries promoted the idea of

global negotiations and the international

community endorsed it when resolution 34/138 was

adopted by the Assembly in 1979, but so far the

momentum needed to make them a reality has been

lacking. Despite all the efforts made—not only by

the Group of 77 but by practically the entire

international com¬munity—hesitation, mainly on

the part of the United States, has prevented the

launching of global negotia¬tions although these

were approved at Cancun with the agreement of the

head of State of that important country, without

which the negotiations would lose their true

scope and meaning.

In these circumstances, we, the developing

coun¬tries, have been thinking about the need to

be less vulnerable to the dealings of the

countries of the North and, in any case, to

stimulate effective co¬operation among ourselves

as a consequence of our solidarity.

Barely a month ago the Intergovernmental

Follow-up and Co-ordination Committee, a key

organ which was established in 1981 in the

Caracas Pro¬gramme of Action,3 held its first

meeting in Manila. The results of the meetings of

experts were reviewed there, and on that basis

important recommendations were made, to be

submitted shortly to the ministerial meeting of

the Group of 77. Without any doubt, it can be

concluded that the Caracas Programme of Action is

functioning. It is complementary to efforts which

might be made in North-South negotiations and a

contribution to the establishment of the new

international economic order.

In the last quarter century Venezuela has

succeeded in consolidating a genuine democracy

solidly rooted in the conduct and beliefs of the

Venezuelan people, a democracy which endeavours

increasingly to play its part within a philosophy

of social justice and respect for the freedom and

dignity of all citizens. The promotion and

effective defence of and respect for human rights

have been important tenets in the foreign policy

of Venezuela. These form the basis of our support

for people that are struggling to gain, maintain

or recover their right to freedom, as a

contribution to the solution of present conflicts

which affect and bar the progress of mankind in

its quest for peace and well-being for all.

It is of the utmost importance for Venezuela to

seek a peaceful and practical solution to the

terri¬torial controversy with the Co-operative

Republic of Guyana.

Venezuela is a country in which the mixture of

the indigenous peoples of America with the

Spanish conquistadors and African groups has

created a population which rejects all forms of

racial discrimi¬nation and in which political,

social and economic democracy is practised, thus

setting an example of coexistence and pluralism.

It is fitting to recall that Venezuela in its 172

years of independent life has never had a single

war, not even an armed encounter, with any of its

neighbours. This is an assertion which few

countries in the world could make, and it is a

source of satisfac¬tion and pride for

Venezuelans. The land borders of Venezuela with

Colombia and Brazil were established by peaceful

means. The maritime borders with four countries

have already been set by common agreement, and

Venezuela is at all times opento negotiations

with its neighbours to solve all matters of

common interest.

For 16 years now Venezuela has been tirelessly

repeating its invitation to Guyana to negotiate,

to seek mutually acceptable solutions to the

dispute. The cause of the dispute is the

mutilation of our territory by the British

Empire. During the last century, starting from

the Esequibo River, which was the boundary with

the sector of Guyana which they had taken away

from Holland, the British advanced from year to

year, almost day after day, over the territory of

defenceless Venezuela, making a mockery of its

protests, until this culminated in an

unprecedented legal farce, in which a so-called

Arbitration Tribunal, with no Venezuelan judge or

lawyer, imposed a totally arbitrary demarcation

line. It did not even take the trouble to give

any kind of justification, reason or explanation,

however spurious or unprecedented, of what was

from every point of view an unbridled plundering.

The history of this humiliating mutilation cannot

be forgotten by Venezuelans. Our entire tradition

and all our instincts move us to desire to

maintain and develop with the Guyanese people the

closest relations of friendship, co-operation and

solidarity. In truth, like ourselves, they were

the victims of British impe¬rialism and, like

ourselves, they are a people which is trying to

achieve development. For this very reason v":

have insisted tirelessly on holding real and

sincere negotiations, inspired by justice and

equity, which will lead us to overcome this

problem that we have inherited, in a satisfactory

and practical way.

The obligation for Venezuela and Guyana to

negotiate their differences is not only a moral

imper¬ative, not only a duty under international

law, but, in this specific case, a commitment

freely entered into in the Agreement signed at

Geneva on 17 February 1966/ In fact, although the

Venezuelan territorial claim naturally preceded

the independence of Guyana, Venezuela, faithful

to its tradition and to its principles, was most

careful to do nothing which would in any way be

used as a pretext to thwart or delay

decolo¬nization for its neighbouring people.

Shortly before the proclamation of indepen¬dence,

Venezuela and the United Kingdom, with the full

participation of the Government of what was then

British Guiana, negotiated and signed the Geneva

Agreement, designed to seek satisfactory

solutions for the practical settlement of the

dispute. This international instrument is the

legal and political framework for the pursuit of

solutions to the dispute and Venezuela has

adhered to it in all its actions. A is

regrettable that thus far the Government of

Guyana has failed to comply with its obligation

to negotiate seriously and sincerely.

Nevertheless, Venezuela has insisted that, within

the peaceful procedures provided in the Geneva

Agreement, the injustices of the past should be

corrected, and thus lay more solid founda¬tions

for a fruitful and lasting co-operation between

the peoples of Venezuela and of Guyana.

Guyanese spokesmen have for years been carrying

out a systematic campaign to incite feelings of

sympathy, by presenting their country as a small

and poor nation whose territory is the object of

the covetousness of a rich and powerful

neighbour, and trying to create an image of

Venezuela as an aggressor country, indifferent to

the laws, to justice, and to the solidarity that

should exist between countries which are

struggling to develop. This kind of assertion,

repeated relentlessly, tends to produce

prejudices among those who have not had an

opportunity to know and analyse the facts. For

almost two decades international forums have been

hearing Guyanese assertions about an imminent

aggression, and yet it is an obvious fact that

there has been no aggression.

We have explained the conduct of Venezuela from

its birth to independent life and regarding the

dispute that we are dealing with. There is not

the slightest basis for asserting that the

Venezuelan terri¬torial claim is prompted by

coveting of present or potential riches which the

people of Guyana could have used to achieve

prosperity and development. Before the

independence of Guyana, British companies were

exploring for and exploiting oil on a large scale

both in Venezuela and in Trinidad. British

companies went mining gold in Venezuela and

bauxite in Demerara. It will be easily understood

that the British, before liberating their colony,

had thoroughly eval¬uated the potential oil and

valuable minerals of the lands that they

controlled. Although prospecting has continued

since the date of independence, no exploitable

mineral resource has been found on the territory

which Venezuela claims.

The truth is crystal clear: Venezuela's claim is

based neither on territorial ambition nor on

covetous- ness of the wealth of others. Had it

been so based, our claim could never have

received, as it has, the unanimous support of

Venezuelans of the most varied political

tendencies under all democratic Governments,

which, during the last five presidential terms,

within a system of complete freedom of

expression, have defended the rights of our

country. That is because this unanimity of the

Venezuelan people has its origin in a very deep

wound. For this reason, we fail to under¬stand

those who, representing the Guyanese people, take

the stand as heirs to the fruits of British

colonial imperialism and defenders of its

unjustifiable abuses.

After repeated rejections of our formal

invita¬tions to the Government of Guyana to begin

negotia¬tions which will provide a satisfactory

and practical solution, Venezuela will submit to

the Secretary- General 3ts decision to indicate a

means to settle the dispute; thus our conduct

will be in accord with the letter and the spirit

of the international treaty signed between the

parties, known as the Geneva Agreement, with a

view to finding a solution to the dispute by

peaceful means.

Venezuela would like Guyana to participate as the

continent moves towards integration. Venezuela

wishes to have a positive relationship with its

neigh¬bour. We feel certain that the people of

Guyana share that desire. We greet all Guyanese,

convinced as we are that an appropriate solution

to the differ¬ences we have inherited from

colonialism will spur us on our way to

convergence toward progress and development.

Venezuela wishes above all to win the battle for

peace and brotherhood with Guyana, because we are

neighbours and because in large measure we are

born of the same American history.

On 24 July 1983 it will be two centuries since

the birth of the Father of our Venezuelan nation,

Simon Bolivar, one of the great liberators of

America. The United Nations, with appropriate

solemnity, commemorated in 1976 the one hundred

and fiftieth anniversary of the convening by the

Liberator Bolivar of the Amphictyonic Congress in

Panama and in 1980 the one hundred and fiftieth

anniversary of his death. My country wishes to

express its gratitude in advance for the tribute

which will be paid to the Liberator in this

political forum of the nations of the world on

the occasion of the bicentenary of his birth.

His prophetic thinking on the need for a

uni¬versal organization in which matters

regarding the peaceful coexistence of nations

could be dealt with has a particular significance

and pertinence today. Bolivar's bicentenary

brings all Latin America together in harmony on

the international scene. It demands that we make

a constructive effort to make the new hemispheric

dialogue a shining success. It leads us to

strengthen our ties with all peoples, especially

those who have faced historical and political

challenges similar to those faced by us.

Venezuela reaffirms its absolute loyalty to the

ideals of Bolivar and commits itself to pursue a

positive policy in all its actions as regards

both our hemisphere and the world as a whole.