YouSaid · the spoken record

Dhanabalan:

THE RECORD WRITES THIS SPEAKER AS DHANABALAN:

lines on the record: 155
first: 1980-09-24
most recent: 1987-09-24
sittings or episodes: 8
sources: un-general-debate

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“The United Nations is a sophisticated instrument that enables its Members to navigate safely the treacherous shoals of international politics to reach the safe harbour of international order. It remains the duty of us, its Members, to find the will to use the United Nations.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“The United Nations Charter embodies such points of reference and contains the basic moral principles that it is our duty to cleave to even as we adapt to survive. Herein lies the uniqueness of the United Nations; it is a vehicle for steadfastness as well as a vehicle for change; a means of ensuring that the necessary and inevitable adaptations will be purposeful rather than random or cynical. It is for this reason that, despite the inevitability of disappointments along the way, I continue to believe that with the perseverance and dedication of this body, just solutions to the Questions of Kampuchea, the Middle East, South Africa, and the many other troubled regions of the world are still possible.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“No viable solution can be found without Prince Norodom Sihanouk's participation. The international community should urge the Vietnamese leaders to talk direct to Prince Norodom Sihanouk. . History has demonstrated that all attempts to deny international change must ultimately be futile. Reality has an inconvenient habit of imposing itself even on the most ostrich-like. As the major Powers make the recalculations that will shape the international politics of the next century our participation in the United Nations helps to ensure that we adapt to the new situation without too long a delay and without too much pain. But even as we acknowledge the necessity of adaptation, we must not lose sight of certain constant and fixed points of reference.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“It will also be the continued pressure from the International community that will force Viet Nam to accept a solution based on the principles of the United Nations Charter, The efforts of the international community and the efforts of the South-East Asian States to find a solution are mutually complementary and not mutually exclusive. The ASEAN States will continue with their good faith efforts to find a solution. We will stay in close touch with Prince Norodom Sihanouk, who has sent a valuable political signal to Viet Nam by deciding to take leave for a year to make himself available for discussion with any party in order to move towards a solution of the Kampuchean problem. Prince Norodom Sihanouk remains the only Kampuchean leader who is widely respected both inside and outside Kampuchea.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“The bald and simple fact is that Viet Nam has not agreed to participate in any discussion that will lead to the withdrawal of its military forces from Kampuchea and enable Kampuchea to re-emerge as a free and independent nation. It would be a tragedy for the Kampucheans, for the South-East Asians and for the international community if the United Nations did not continue to take a clear and principled stand on the issue. It was the pressure of the United Nations that forced Viet Nam to accept the fact that a Kampuchean problem existed and that it required a political solution.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Professor Kusumaatmadja's proposal therefore envisaged that Viet Nam would respond to our consideration in good faith of its interests by participating in the meeting of the Khmers, though not necessarily in the initial stages. Unfortunately, Viet Nam has refused to acknowledge that it holds the key to the solution of the Kampuchean problem and has not agreed to participate in such talks. Instead Viet Nam has tried to distort the nature of the understanding that was reached, it has loudly claimed that some kind of agreement was reached between the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Indo-Chinese States and that the international community could best help by refusing to take a position that would support one side or the other.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“One recent proposal which is fully in accordance with the United Nations spirit is that made by my Indonesian colleague, Professor Kusumaatmadja, who has proposed that an informal meeting of all the Kampuchean parties be convened. Such a meeting would take into account the fact that the Kampuchean problem also has to be resolved between the different Khmer factions, a point that Viet Nam has maintained ever since the Kampuchean issue was first considered by the United Nations Security Council in January 1979. But it is obvious that Viet Nam, as the State whose military forces and civilian administrators are in occupation of Kampuchea, holds in its hands the unique ability to determine whether such a meeting among the Khmers would be meaningful or a mere charade.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Gorbachev's friends and allies will share his insight and take his advice. In formulating proposals that embody this principle the United Nations also has a vital role to play. The resolutions of the General Assembly on the situation in Kampuchea that have been adopted, time and again, by overwhelming majorities sketch out the framework for such a solution. They take into consideration the Interests of all the parties concerned, not least of which are Viet Nam's interests. And because they reflect the voice of the international community, United Nations resolutions should not be regarded as a victory for one State or one party over another but rather as a triumph of our common humanity. There should be no dishonour or disadvantage in complying with United Nations resolutions.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“The United Nations can take credit for this Important first step; but it Is only a first step. For Viet Nam to take the next step of actually commencing negotiations to find a political solution, the United Nations must persuade Viet Nam by continuing to take a firm position on the issue. For a political solution to be durable, it must be just. It must address the common concerns of the parties involved and not merely be a covet under which to impose one State's will over another by duplicitous means. This simple truth was stated with clarity and brevity by Mr. Gorbachev when he Said: "The ultimate wisdom lies in not thinking solely of oneself or, worse still, to the detriment of the other side. All must feel that they have the same degree of security." We hope that Mr.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“On 5 January 1980 the Vietnamese Foreign Minister and some of his Indo-Chinese colleagues signed a communiqué which dealt with Kampuchea. He said/ "The situation in Kampuchea is irreversible." He also affirmed that efforts to "find a political solution for Kampuchea were in vain and useless". Six and a half years later after successive General Assembly resolutions had enjoined his country to agree to a political solution, the Vietnamese Foreign Minister, at a similar meeting, signed a communiqué acknowledging that he had to work with other countries "to reach a political solution on the Kampuchean question". The move from a denial that a problem even exists to an admission that there is a problem that can be solved only by political means is a very significant first step.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“When the United Nations Security Council first met to discuss the invasion and occupation of Kampuchea, in January 1979, Viet Nam at first denied that it had sent any of its forces into Kampuchea. Later it claimed that it had only sent in volunteers. Finally, under pressure from the United Nations, Viet Nam admitted that it had sent its armed forces into Kampuchea, but it insisted that they had entered at the invitation of the regime it had installed in Phnom Penh after the invasion, which was really an attempt to suggest that the cart had pulled the horse into Kampuchea. United Nations pressure has also changed Viet Nam’s position on the crucial issue of whether a political settlement is necessary in Kampuchea.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“The United Nations speaks for all, and in upholding universal principles of law and justice the United Nations transcends the national and specific by speaking also to that irreducible core of common interests that bind us together, whatever else may divide us. It is an axiom that States act in their own interest, but the United Nations acts in the interest of all. No State, however intransigent, however indifferent, therefore, can indefinitely ignore the United Nations. A case in point is an issue of vital importance to my country's region: the issue of Kampuchea. As a study of how the United Nations has influenced the definition of Member States' interests, Kampuchea is an issue of more than parochial significance.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“The United Nations is thus uniquely situated to help the smaller States adapt to changing patterns of international politics. Only in the United Nations are our interests protected·, and only the United Nations can define issues in a manner that helps to ease the painful process of readjustment. It does so because when the international community speaks through the adoption of United Nations resolutions by overwhelming majorities no State, even if it does not wholly support a particular resolution, should feel threatened. Every State, whatever its particular interest, is also part of that same international community. The United Nations compels States, even against their will, to recognize what is ultimately in their own best interest. It would be a mistake to regard the United Nations merely as a reflection of national interests.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Few, if any, of us have the ability to influence directly the recalculations of national interests that are occurring as the great Powers slowly but inexorably reorder their relationships. Only in the United Nations can we meet as formal equals. The United Nations, for all its obvious imperfections, is still the only 0rganization that has at least the potential to protect the rights and interests of small States. Great Powers may be able to do without international institutions, but to Namibians and Palestinians fighting for their homelands, to the South Africans battling against the evil system of apartheid and to all oppressed peoples struggling against foreign invasion and occupation only the United Nations offers some hope that their interests will not be cast into oblivion as the great Powers reposition themselves.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“It was intended to reorder the manner in which the international system worked and the way in which States dealt with each other. If its purposes and promise have not been entirely fulfilled we should nevertheless ask ourselves what role the United Nations can play in helping the vast majority of its Members adapt to the profound transformations that are now under way. We, the small States of the third world, make up that majority. I believe that the United Nations has an important role to play. To dismiss it as irrelevant is easy, cheap, cynical and a serious mistake. Few, if any, of us present here are privy to the private discussions of the great Powers.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“First, in terms of the supreme interests of survival, the world is one, notwithstanding its diversity. .. Second, the security of any State would be greater If It abandoned the attempts to diminish the security of the other side." I wish to emphasize that last sentence. That statement was made by the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union, Alexander Bessmertnykh. If a super-Power recognizes the need for change, no other country should deceive itself with the illusion that it can keep to the well-trodden path. History is littered with the rubble of States that tried to do so. The United Nations is itself the consequence of a similar period of international readjustment that occurred after the Second World War.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Ingrained patterns of behaviour and comfortably familiar policies must be ruthlessly and dispassionately examined in the light of the new situation and, if necessary, discarded. Human nature being what it is, this is necessarily a painful process. But it has to be done. I was reminded of this simple fact by a recent statement made by an important international leader. At a meeting of disarmament experts organized by the United Nations, held in June this year, he said: "... we had to review analytically the traditional approaches to, and established notions about, peace and security. In other words, we had to apply new thinking to that major issue of our times. In the process of sorting out. outdated dogmas and stereotypes, we made at least two fundamental conclusions.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“This session of the Assembly is being held at a time when profound changes are under way in the basic structures and processes of international politics. A summit meeting between President Reagan and Mr. Gorbachev will be held towards the end of the year. The two super-Powers are on the verge of concluding important arms control agreements. At the same time, relations between China and the Soviet Union now include an increasingly important co-operative dimension. These developments do not concern only the three great Powers directly Involved. When these Powers reorder their relationships, the ripples spread to the farthest corners of the International system. None of us can escape their consequences. We must all also adapt to these changes. Readjustment is never easy. Cherished habits of thought.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Please allow me to congratulate you, Sir, to your unanimous election. We are confident that, with your sensitive understanding of the complexities of the international situation and your considerable diplomatic experience, you will guide our deliberations fairly and wisely in the coming months. I should also like to welcome Ambassador Joseph Reed to the podium and congratulate him on his assumption of the post of Under-Secretary-General for Political and General Assembly Affairs. The Secretary-General could have found no better person for the job. Last, but not least, please allow me to place on record our appreciation of the good work done by your predecessor His Excellency Mr. Humayun Rasheed Choudhury.”
1987-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 42 (1987)
“Even though the anti-United Nations mood is at a high point in many countries, the pendulum will swing back if the United Nations sends the right signals to the international community. Until these difficult moments pass and the storm clears, the United Nations will have to run a tight ship, and our captain, the Secretary-General, must quickly resolve the administrative and other management problems that plague the Organization. We are counting upon the President of the General Assembly to forge a consensus agreement on budgetary questions that will be acceptable to all Member States, to ensure that the financial trickle that keeps the Organization going will not dry up completely in the near future.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“Tragically, four of the five permanent member States have not taken their duties seriously in respect of their financial obligations. They have indulged in the illegal practice of withholding finance, which threatens to cripple the Organization. Article 17 (2) of the United Nations Charter clearly states that "The expenses of the Organization shall be borne by the Members as apportioned by the General Assembly." The operative word is "shall". It is our obligation as States Members of the United Nations to pay our assessed contributions to the United Nations budget whatever complaints we may have about the Organization. As a gesture of good faith, permanent members should cease the illegal practice of withholding and pay their dues. I do not expect that these problems will be resolved easily or quickly. Political trends evolve slowly.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“Consensus, in our definition, consensus does not mean that any Member State, large or small, has the power of veto. It means a spirit of give and take, a spirit of understanding each other 's interests. Fundamentally, this is the new understanding we have to recreate in the United Nations. We have to rebuild the political compact that once existed between the small States and the great Powers on the role and purpose of the United Nations. We cannot afford to ignore the views of the great Powers. The Charter itself confers many special responsibilities on the five permanent member States of the Security Council, including the high responsibility of selecting the Secretary-General. Those special rights go hand in hand with a special duty and obligation to maintain the strength and integrity of the Organization.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“This reckless use of our votes has unfortunately led us to the present crisis and will only ensure the continuation of the crisis. If we try to do the same with the budgetary procedure, we shall only aggravate the problems of the United Nations, and solve none. last year, just before the fortieth anniversary celebrations, former Presidents of the General Assembly met at a seminar in !Mew York. With their collective wisdom, they passed on some pieces of advice to us. One was that the making of decisions by consensus should be encouraged and incorporated in the rules of procedure. We should heed that advice. Consensus is what we should aim for in financial matters. Where I come from, in South-East Asia, we have word for consensus: it is mushawarah.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“The political departments should be consolidated. The forty-first session of the General Assembly should quickly endorse those recommendations. There is, unfortunately, one unresolved issue in the report of the Group of Kigh-Level Intergovernmental Experts, and this concerns the critical question of budgetary management. I fear that if this issue is not resolved quickly the financial crisis will drag on. The existence of the United Nations will continue to be precarious. Each time the Organization stumbles the interests of the small States suffer. As they make up the vast majority of the membership, the small States can easily vote in any budgetary procedure they like - as the* have tended to do, against the wishes of the larger States, in regard to budgetary natters.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“If we fail to resolve these financial problems the United Nations will shrink ana die. If it dies, all its considerable political achievements over the years and all the resolutions that we have adopted reaffirming the inter national community's moral and legitimate stands on the critical issues of apartheid and Namibia, the Middle East and Palestine and Kanpuchea and Afghanistan will also disappear. Fortunately for us, the Group of High-Level Intergovernmental Experts, which was entrusted with the task of reviewing administrative and financial matters in the United Nations, has come up with a reasonable report recommending some reforms. Staff should be reduced by 15 per cent and the overstaffed higher levels by 25 per cent. Fewer consultants should be hired. Official travel should be curtailed.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“Member States which account for almost 80 per cent of the assessed budget either cast a negative vote or abstained in the vote. This is disturbing evidence of a growing division in the membership on financial matters which, if long continued, can have very negative implications for the Organization. This financial crisis is only a symptom of greater disillusionment with the United Nations. None the less, we can and should resolve it quickly. The choice for small States is clear. We can either continue to engage in long and unseemly negotiations over the finances needed to keep the United Nations going or we can concentrate on substantive political issues. The longer we argue over what is, relatively, a financial drop in the ocean, the less attention we can pay to substantive political issues.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“The reckless attacks of previous years have led to the inevitable result that both the Soviet Union and the United States decided, no matter what their other disagreements may be, to ignore and sometimes to undermine the United Nations. It is not surprising that the largest financial withholdings have been made by the Soviet Union and the United States. The art of political moderation must be relearned by all of us. The immediate complaints of the super-Powers and the larger nation States concern the financial management of the Organization. The Secretary-General has wisely alerted us to their complaints. He said on 18 December 1985: "Even though the budget adopted by the Fifth Committee provides for a real growth of only 0.1 per cent.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“Indeed, they welcomed it and relied upon it, but they made great and somewhat successful exertions to modify it, and to confine its expression within tolerable bounds." (New York, Random House: 3rd edition, 1964, p. 57) Unfortunately, many small States have failed to realize the wisdom of such moderation in our deliberations. Instead; we have constantly passed resolutions, routinely, recklessly and often selectively condemning a great Power. This has not brought us any closer to our goal of convincing any great Power to behave otherwise. All our resolutions should be carefully crafted, tempered by wisdom and judgment, to persuade great Powers that it is in their interest to take cognizance of the needs of small States.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“The threats to small States will always come from the medium-sized States and the big Powers. We need their continued adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter. And we need their continued commitment to the Organization. How can we achieve this? Perhaps we should see what the small States did at the very beginning of the United Nations. Here I quote from the classic work of Inis Claude, "Swords into Plowshares": "Small States are not necessarily the saints of the international community; if great nations are inclined to abuse their strength by behaving dictatorially, small ones are often tempted to abuse their weakness by behaving irresponsibly. But many small State representatives at San Francisco displayed a high degree of statesmanship. They did not challenge the principle of great Power leadership.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“If our world is not able to squeeze out this small amount to keep the United Nations functioning, it is a clear sign that the international community has lost faith in the United Nations. It will not be easy to rebuild this Organization. The small States, which make up the vast majority of the membership, have never lost faith. They know that global adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter is crucial for their survival. We need the United Nations, as Article 1 of the Charter states: "to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples". If these principles disappear, together with the United Nations, life for the small States could become very hazardous. Yet a United Nations composed only of small States would be a pointless Organization.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“For the long term, the United Nations can only continue to function when there is a reasonable consensus among all its Members that this is an Organization worth saving. The fortieth anniversary celebrations, which saw the largest gathering mankind has seen of Heads of State or Government, seemed to indicate that all nations were committed to this Organization. One year later, the United Nations coffers are running dry. The same nation States have locked up their purses. Such actions always speak louder than words. The money needed to save the United Nations is a pittance. The annual budget of the United Nations is $US 800 million. It is just a drop in the ocean compared to the world's combined income of about $US 13 trillion, or more accurately it is only 0.006 per cent of the combined world income.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“In his report dated 21 August 1986, he said that against assessed contributions of $US 978 million payable as at 1 January 1986, only $US 568 million had been collected by the end of July. If these withholdings continue, the United Nations may have to cease operations one day. What is to be done? One thing is clear. A ship passing through a storm cannot proceed under full sail. When treacherous winds and currents appear, seasoned sailors trim their sails, batten down their hatches and offload excess baggage. Wisely, the captain of our ship, the Secretary-General, has begun doing this. Even more wisely, the Member States endorsed his actions at the resumed session of the General Assembly in April this year. These are, however, only short-term measures.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“He also provided firm and determined leadership at the resumed session to ensure that the financial crisis did not overwhelm the United Nations. We thank him. There is a consensus that the United Nations is going through one of its most difficult periods. Some call it the "crisis of multilateralism". The Chinese word for "crisis" is a combination of two characters: "danger" Wei and "opportunity" This is the situation that the United Nations faces today. The danger is clear. The gradual erosion of faith in the United Nations, evidenced by the growing practice of financial withholdings, threatens the financial integrity of the Organization. The Secretary-General has periodically issued reports on the "current financial crisis" to remind Members how fragile the financial situation is.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“We meet this year under inauspicious circumstances. There is a storm brewing that threatens to sink the United Nations. We are fortunate to be guided by you Sir, in this difficult moment. Coming from a brother country in Asia, we know that Bangladesh has weathered many a storm with courage, determination and grit. With this background and your considerable political and diplomatic experience, I am confident that you will provide us with the right leadership to guide us through the difficult days ahead. Please allow me also to pause a moment to place on record our deep appreciation for the work done by your predecessor, Ambassador Jaime de Pinies. He saw the United Nations through one of its most triumphant moments, the fortieth anniversary celebrations.”
1986-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 41 (1986)
“If we, the smaller nation Members of the United Nations, can continue to steer a wise and careful course between the two super-Powers, if we can continue to reaffirm our commitment, both in word and deed, to the United Nations Charter, and if we can gradually cleanse the deliberations of this body of empty rhetoric and posturing, then I am confident that when we reach port in the 21st century, the United Nations will continue to be relevant. Singapore, as one of the smallest member States of the United Nations, is solemnly dedicated to the task of moving the United Nations into the 21st century, and we begin by repledging our commitment, both in word and in deed, to the purposes and principles of the united Nations Charter.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“In June this year, several former Presidents of the United Nations General Assembly met under the able chairmanship of Ambassador Paul Lusaka in New York to discuss the state of the United Nations. I commend their report to you. Their prescriptions were many. The United Nations Secretariat needs tight management. In the debates, consensus building should be promoted. The number and the length of United Nations resolutions should be reduced. Every effort should be made to eliminate agenda items which are no longer relevant. Meetings should start on time. If all these recommendations were adopted, the world would pay greater heed to the deliberations of this body and the important resolutions adopted each year.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“This is not a frivolous or purely rhetorical suggestion. In village meetings it is sometimes useful to let off steam. The United Nations has performed this function admirably. Countless small wars have been avoided because some wise leaders have transported their anger and the anger of their populations to the hall of this General Assembly, allowing it to explode in this hall, and thus bringing a catharsis to their populations and reducing the impulse towards war. No other global institution can perform this thankless task. Too much anger and rhetoric, however, can poison the atmosphere. This too has happened in the United Nations. This institution is being overcome by the fumes of its own rhetoric. We are not the first to make this observation.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“We fear that the international institutions of today are unable to cope with the new networks and patterns of interdependence that are evolving each day. It is no longer accurate to say that we belong to the same planet. The old cliche that the world is a global village is more true today than ever before. Throughout history village communities have tended to be stable and enduring. People do care about their own neighbourhoods. They adopt careful and responsible positions on issues directly affecting them. In this shrinking global village it is inevitable that nations will eventually view global issues more responsibly when they see the direct implications for themselves. That day will come. We could help to expedite it by transforming this Assembly and perhaps the Security Council into a village council.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“The world is shrinking at a pace unprecedented in the history of man. Nations that were once separated by mountains and oceans can now look squarely into each other's eyes. Tremendous developments in telecommunications and computer technology have made this possible. In July this year, almost one and a half billion people or one quarter of this globe's population simultaneously watched a live concert held to raise aid for Africa. On this shrinking globe, where there are massive movements of peoples and goods every day, a political disturbance in Asia could lead to bombs being placed on aircraft in Canada; a new and frightening disease afflicting North America could be carried to the opposite side of the globe within twenty-four hours.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“They have done so not only because it is a noble idea but because it was the closest they could come to obtaining a guarantee for their survival. Will this revolutionary concept of equal nation States survive into the 21st century? It may. But to do so, all nation States need to invest in a strong and stable international political order. A credible, effectively functioning United Nations which strongly reinforces the principles of territorial integrity and sovereign equality, will make it easier for even the smallest States of the world to retain their independence. The small nations of this world which try to cheat on the rules of the Charter are really sowing the seeds of their own destruction. Technological advances are making the united Nations more relevant each day.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“If the United Nations has not succeeded in erasing the habit of 5,000 years of recorded history, it should be remembered that the "forty years of the United Nations existence is a mere wink in time. Going against the natural unfolding of history, the Charter of the United Nations states in Article 2 that the United Nations "is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members". The Charter's concepts of national sovereignty and territorial integrity means that while nations have the right to become strong and mighty if they with to do so, they have no right to expand beyond their borders. It is therefore not surprising that all the fragile new States that have emerged in the last 40 years have quickly reaffirmed their commitment to the United Nations.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“In historical terms, file, Charter of the United Nations is a remarkably revolutionary document. Man's recorded history has witnessed the rise and fall of many societies and nations. The law of the jungle prevailed. Those that became mighty claimed the right to occupy neighboring territories, enslaving or massacring populations as their armies marched across different lands. In June 1945, a brave little document emerged which declared that all this had to stop. This document was the Charter of the United Nations. The critics of the United Nations who wish to see this Organization swept from the face of this earth should pause to consider the alternative.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“It is therefore a myth - perpetuated especially by one super-tanker - that revolution and turbulence are good for the third world. The small States of the third world would do well to remember that a more stable international political order would increase our chances for survival. A stable order would increase trade, investment and financial flows to the third world, enhancing our prospects for economic development. My remarks today are therefore not addressed to the super-tankers but to the over one hundred nations that are small boats and rafts. Let us pool our interests and work for a stronger, more credible and more effective United Nations because it is the only - I repeat only - international institution dedicated to such a stable international political order.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“While it is true that all of us may perish if there is a collision between these two super-tankers, such a collision is not going to occur because both of them have too much to lose from a direct collision. That is why Soviet or American soldiers have died fighting each other in the last 40 years. Each super-tanker, however, has tried to recruit small boats to ram into each other, or to churn up the waters around them in the name of revolution and liberation. Coming from a small nation like Singapore it has always been a source of amazement to us that there are so many small nations which are willing to be seduced into this task of generating turbulence. When such turbulence occurs, the super-tankers are not threatened. It is oily the other small boats that face the danger of capsizing.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“There is a clear danger that this Organization may become irrelevant to issues of peace and security, the primary issues for which it was founded. To prevent that from happening, let each Member of the United Nations ask itself this question: Who gains if the United Nations fails? To use a contemporary analogy, we could liken the super-Powers to supertankers and the majority of nations of the world to little boats and some of them even to little rafts that are barely afloat. In looking at contemporary issues of war and peace, the United Nations has often fallen into the trap of looking at the world' from the perspective of the super-tanker. Several disarmament resolutions proclaim that the central issue of the day is the danger of a collision between these two super-tankers. This, in my opinion, is not so.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“Unfortunately, in South-East Asia Viet Nam continues to denounce and reject United Nations resolutions on Cambodia, thereby undermining the credibility and legitimacy of this entire Organization. Only recently, the Non-Aligned Ministerial Meeting in Luanda reaffirmed that Movement's commitment to the decisions of the United Nations and the principles of the United Nations Charter. If, as it is often claimed by Viet Nam, Viet Nam sincerely desires to live in peace with its neighbors, it should conform to the spirit and principles of the Movement by immediately implementing the United Nations resolutions on Cambodia. I do not belong to the ranks of pessimists who claim that the days of the United Nations are numbered. I do believe, however, that the United Nations today is in some peril.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“Each year we have here taken principled stands on such key instances of foreign aggression and occupation as on the rights of the Palestinian people, and the Namibian people, and the occupation by Soviet and Vietnamese armies of Afghanistan and Cambodia. In spite of our clear statements, the conflicts persist, resulting in critics of the United Nations suggesting that this Organization may have failed. Recent developments in South Africa have given us a ray of hope. The United Nations critics claimed in the past that persistent condemnation of apartheid in this Hall would make no difference. The events of the last few weeks, where both the South African people and the international community have ferociously broken down some of the pillars of the apartheid regime, demonstrate that the persistence of this Organization can pay off.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“The debates of the Security Council and the General AssetrJaly, which once gripped world attention, are now generally given scant consideration. The Charter states that the United Nations was created "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war". Yet in the last 40 years there have been about 150 armed conflicts, big and small, which have killed 16 million people, and perhaps as many as 20 million. In 1983 alone, there were 40 separate armed conflicts, major and minor, involving 75 countries, or half the membership of the United Nations. The majority of the victims of these conflicts have come from the developing countries. The United Nations has not been indifferent to these conflicts.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“Not least among the achievements of the thirty-ninth session was the great outpouring of concern, both in words and deeds, for the crisis that afflicted many African nations. This was due in no small part to Ambassador Lusaka's efforts. We thank him. In recent years, the United Nations has also benefited from the wise guidance provided by the Secretary-General, His Excellency Javier Perez de Cuellar. In a series of remarkably candid and insightful annual reports, from 1982 to 1985, he has openly discussed and analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of this Organization. Those who wish to understand where the United Nations stands today need go no further than these four annual reports to grasp the crisis and the challenges facing the United Nations today. The prestige of the united Nations is at an all-time low.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)
“Allow me to congratulate the President on his assumption of this high office. There are few men in this hall who have been associated with the United Nations as long as he has. If the fortieth session of the United Nations General Assembly is to provide meaningful new directions for the future, it will require vision and leadership. It could not have found a better man than him to guide it. Please allow me also to pause a moment and place on record our deep appreciation for the work done by his predecessor, Ambassador Paul Lusaka. He brought great honor to his country and to the continent of Africa with his fine stewardship of the General Assembly through the thirty-ninth session.”
1985-09-24 · UN General Assembly · General Debate, Session 40 (1985)