45th Session
13th Plenary Meeting, 28th September, 1990

Speech by Mr. I. K. Gujral

It is with a deep sense of history that I address the General Assembly at its forty-fifth session,
the first since the end of the cold war.

The confidence we repose in Mr. Guido de Marco provides us with the assurance that this
session, under his stewardship, will reach decisions that will strengthen global peace and
co-operation and enhance global well-being. At the very outset let me say how happy I am that
the Foreign Minister of the friendly, non-aligned State of Malta is presiding over this session. I
must also record our appreciation for the leadership displayed by Major-General Joseph
Garba in presiding over the forty-fourth session.

I also join other Members of the United Nations in welcoming in our midst the newest Member
of the United Nations, Liechtenstein. It gives us special joy also to see a united Yemen in our
midst. Forty-five years ago India was one of the relatively small number of States that were
present at the creation of the United Nations. The United Nations was born of a war- shattered
world's hope that it would be the benign, sometimes stern guardian of a world at peace,
committed to peace and co-operation between nations. Unfortunately, the end of the Second
World War did not bring peace; it brought a long, often icy, cold war. Scores of new nations
in Asia and Africa emerged as sovereign States from the rumbling empires of Europe. The
cold war had a negative impact on the life of those new nations. We in the so-called third
world remained firmly committed to the United Nations as the only organisation that could
usher in a truly world-wide peace and promote global well- being. The vicissitudes through
which the United Nations passed did not diminish our faith in the Organization.

We, the nations of the South, have special reason to rejoice at the end of the cold war. India is
all the happier because from the very moment of its independence it sought to end the cold
war. We joined other nations to enunciate the principles of non- alignment to protect the
independence of new nations and their right to choose for themselves the kind of international
relations they wished to have and the models of development they wished to adopt. We
welcome the collapse of the cold-war divide. I trust that the cold-war mindframe which took
deep root during the past 45 years will now yield to the new mindframe of global detente and
co-operation.

An event of special importance in this context is the imminent unification of Germany. This
will reflect the fulfilment of the deepest aspirations of the German people. In the new Europe
which is emerging, a united Germany in the model foreseen by a great son of Germany,
Thomas Mann, will be a powerful factor in favour of stability and peaceful co-operation. India
looks forward to working closely with a united Germany in the cause of peace and progress
around the world.

India always rejected the logic of the cold war and the division of the international community
into opposing blocs. In accordance with our policy of non-alignment, we sought to build up
relations of trust and friendship simultaneously with both the Soviet Union and the United
States. The replacement of East-West confrontation by a new co- operative approach has
greatly facilitated our task. The past year has seen a further strengthening of our ties with the
great democracy of the United States. With our time-tested friend, the Soviet Union, we are
adding new dimensions to our friendly co- operation. We hail the historic endeavours of the
Soviet people to reshape their political and economic structures on the basis of democracy,
unity and economic efficiency.

The United Nations was a participant in many of the momentous changes during the year. Its
work in Namibia and Nicaragua provided splendid examples of its role, testifying to its
renewed relevance and effectiveness in international affairs. A great deal of the credit goes to
the United Nations Secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, for his patient, prudent,
painstaking and imaginative management of the world body. We wish him and his colleagues
continued success in their undertakings.

The Secretary-General perceptively observes in his report on the work of the Organization this
year:

"It has been a wholesome development of recent years that the international discourse has been
disburdened of excessive ideological or rhetorical baggage. It is far easier to accommodate
contentious interests or claims, honestly stated, than to reconcile opposing doctrines. If the
new mood of pragmatism which has released us from the thraldom of the cold war is to spread
all over the world, nations need to shed the vestigial prejudices of former times and couch
their dialogue in terms of common sense and plain justice." (A/45/1, p. 34)

These are truly wise words spoken at a critical turn of history.

India joins the many nations that now wish to see the United Nations emerge as the pivot and
fulcrum of international peace and security. The new effectiveness of the United Nations owes
a great deal to the fact that the earlier confrontational relationship between the great Powers
gave way to detente, which in turn has led to a new collaborative relationship. A co-operative
relationship among the major Powers is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for true
multilateralism. The latter requires the full and equal participation of all nations-big and
small-in the multilateral decision-making process. The great issues of the day can no longer be
decided in the capitals of a few major Powers. The voice of the majority must not only be
heard but also be respected. The democratic principle is an essential requirement of a
genuinely multilateral system. Nor can the concerns of the deprived majority of the world's
population be denied priority on the international agenda. The new political prestige of the
United Nations must be complemented by increased efficacy in other areas, particularly in the
economic field. Peace and development are closely interrelated and deserve equal attention. In
the final analysis, the success of the United Nations will be measured in terms of its ability to
reflect and meet the concerns of the majority of mankind.

India is gravely concerned at the crisis in the Gulf region. India's position was, and remains,
clear and consistent. We are against the use or threat of force in the settlement of differences in
inter-State relations. We firmly oppose aggression. The crisis has arisen from the Iraqi
invasion of Kuwait. It follows that Iraq must withdraw its forces from Kuwait as demanded by
the Security Council. India does not recognize Kuwait's annexation. Kuwait's independence
and sovereignty must be restored. Any differences between the two neighbouring States must
be resolved exclusively through peaceful means. India fully subscribes to and strictly abides
by all the resolutions of the Security Council concerning this crisis. At the same time, we
believe that all efforts must be made to achieve a peaceful political resolution of the crisis.

The current crisis has led to the induction of foreign forces into the Gulf region. In the changed
world environment, a permanent foreign military presence is not desired by any country, nor
would it be in anyone's interest.

For a very long time India has maintained the most cordial and friendly relations will, Kuwait
and Iraq. Almost 200,000 of our nationals who were present in these countries when the crisis
erupted found themselves caught up in its coils. Provision of essential food supplies for these
and other innocent victims from third countries is a matter of the highest importance, from the
humanitarian point of view, to the entire world community.

In West Asia there can be no durable peace without a just and comprehensive settlement based
on the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, as well as the right of
all States in the region, including Palestine and Israel, to live in peace and security within
internationally recognized borders, in accordance with United Nations Security Council
resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). Israel's attempts to suppress the intifadah or block
progress towards a dialogue cannot succeed. A United Nations-sponsored international
conference on the Middle East should be convened at an early date.

India reaffirms its solidarity with the people of Cyprus, part of whose country remains under
foreign occupation. We fully support the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of that
country. Obstacles have recently been thrown up in the way of the Secretary- General's efforts
on Cyprus. The Secretary-General deserves the continuing and full support of the international
community in his endeavours.

Some of the most hopeful developments during the year relate to southern Africa. Earlier this
year we warmly welcomed independent Namibia into this world body. Developments in South
Africa hold out promise of real progress. Nelson Mandela, freed after a quarter of a century
behind bars, galvanized the currents of peaceful change.

We welcome the talks initiated between the African National Congress (ANC) and the South
African Government to clear the way for negotiations on a new non-racial constitution. We are
concerned, however, at the continuing violence in the townships and the involvement of the
South African security forces in the violence. The South African Government must urgently
deal with the problem, in order to remove this threat to the process of peaceful change. While
racism is on the retreat in South Africa, in Fiji a constitution has been imposed which
institutionalises racial discrimination. The Suva regime flouts internationally accepted
principles of democracy and human rights. Its undemocratic and racially discriminatory
policies are unacceptable.

In the Korean peninsula there have been some encouraging signs of reconciliation and
dialogue. We regard the recent historic meetings between the Prime Ministers of the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea as a major step forward.
We hope that this process will be further strengthened in future months. We support all efforts
aimed at the peaceful reunification of Korea. In conformity with the principle of universality,
we further support the aspirations of the Korean people to be represented in the United
Nations so that they may actively contribute towards the realization of the purposes and
principles of the United Nations.

There has been encouraging progress towards a resolution of the Cambodian problem. The
recent Jakarta meeting and the decision on the Supreme National Council hold out the promise
of an early return to normalcy. A settlement of the problem should fully reflect Cambodia's
sovereignty and independence and ensure that its people can exercise their democratic right to
determine their own destiny free from foreign interference and intervention. In this process the
United Nations can and should play an important role.

Myanmar continues to held in thrall by forces unwilling to accept the decision that its people
took in the national elections held there in May of this year. We call upon Yangon to accept the
people's verdict and work with the latter to establish peace and democracy in that country.

Relations with our northern neighbour, the People's Republic of China, have shown a steady
and welcome improvement. Both countries have expressed their determination to settle the
boundary question through peaceful and friendly consultations and also to develop relations
actively in a variety of other fields. In the world where confrontation is giving way to
co-operation, friendly co-operation between India and China is all the more important.

We have recently had the honour of receiving the President of Afghanistan in India. His
presence in our midst reflected the common desire of both our countries to strengthen further
the co-operative and friendly relations that have traditionally existed between them. We
believe that full and faithful implementation of the Geneva Agreements so arduously
constructed by the Secretary-General will restore normalcy, stabilize the life and security of
the Afghan peoples and also help in furthering the cause of peace and good-neighbourliness in
South Asia.

We warmly welcome the return of democracy in our neighbouring country, Nepal. Differences
that had earlier crept into our relations were happily and speedily resolved after the transition
in Nepal, thus reflecting the deep aspirations of the two neighbours.

With the background of the improved inter-State relationships in South Asia, which have been
universally welcomed, I would not have taken the time of this body to talk about the aberration
pertaining to the bilateral relations between India and Pakistan. In his address my worthy
colleague the Foreign Minister of Pakistan has tried to provoke me into an exchange of
polemics on issues that are patently internal to India. May I say I will not oblige him.

For more than 8 years now Pakistan has nursed and armed terroristic activities in the Indian
State of Punjab. This has caused immense human suffering. Of late Pakistan has chosen to
extend those practices to another State of India, Jammu and Kashmir, again resulting in
extensive misery and loss of innocent lives. All efforts on our part to persuade the Government
of Pakistan to desist from those activities were first ignored and then rejected.
Characteristically, Pakistan denied responsibility and involvement in those acts. Now it is
trying to justify them on the pretext of support to religious fundamentalism. This,
representatives will agree, is against the established principles of international law and
good-neighbourliness. The Indo-Pakistan Shimia Agreement signed in 1972 has fully spelled
out those principles, and, despite Pakistan's blatant violation, India has continued its quest to
build a wholesome relationship of cordiality and friendship that I know the people of our two
countries need and desire.

The arms race, support of terrorism and aggressive polemics only add to tensions and create a
climate of instability so much out of place in the contemporary global environment.

We have recently proposed to Pakistan a set of measures that would induce confidence and
co-operation. But, I say with sadness, Pakistan has chosen to ignore them and to persist in its
unacceptable activities. Our two neighbouring countries can have a great future if we respect
each other's integrity and unity, and once Pakistan desists from the temptation of interfering in
our internal affairs. It is in this spirit that I will not refer to the gross flouting of human rights in
Pakistan, particularly in Sind and Baluchistan. To cover up those inhuman acts a duly elected
Government has recently been dismissed. But that is Pakistan's internal matter, even though
democrats everywhere feel concerned.

We believe that regional organizations have acquired an added relevance and can play an
important role in promoting international co-operation. In our region the South Asian
Association for Regional Co-operation is making a most valuable contribution by fostering a
climate of constructive co-operation. We look forward to the steady expansion of its activities,
and we do hope that in the coming days Afghanistan and a democratic Myanmar will join that
organization to build an era so much needed in our part of the world.

The reordering of Eastern Europe is epoch making. India welcomes that reaffirmation of the
democratic spirit. The changes in that region have understandably prompted the generous
instincts of the industrialised world. We hope that Eastern Europe's integration into the world
economy will serve the interests of all nations. We look forward to strengthening our ties of
co-operation with those countries. At the same time we also expect that the East-West thaw
will not result in depriving the developing world of augmented economic assistance.

We have yet to harness effectively the extraordinary opportunities for the success of
disarmament efforts created by the sweeping political changes in Europe and in East-West
relations. We look forward to the conclusion of a START treaty and an agreement on
conventional forces in Europe by the end of this year, as promised. However, those
agreements would not justify complacency on the part of the United Nations or international
public opinion, as huge arsenals still remain. There is no underlying commitment to give up the
doctrine of nuclear deterrence, and avenues for qualitative upgrading of nuclear weapons
remain open. Nothing less than a time-bound programme for the elimination of nuclear
weapons would sustain a continuous process of deep and substantial reduction until we get rid
of the nuclear menace. We also need clear guarantees that the nuclear weapons that are phased
out will not be replaced by new, advanced weapons.

With the end of the cold war we feel that now is the time-and a most opportune one-for the
international community to question the validity of theories that seek to justify continuation of
nuclear weapons. Inter-State relations should be based on co- operation and dialogue instead
of mutual fears and frozen hostility. A new international security order needs.to be created to
prepare us to move towards a nuclear-weapon-free and non-violent world order outlined
within a systematic, rational and practicable time- frame for achieving those objectives.

The positive developments during the past three years since the United Nations Conference on
Disarmament and Development have only further vindicated the essential premises of that
Conference. Now is the time for seriously exploring the actual ways and means of channeling
the peace dividend for the development of the countries of the South that have had to face the
adverse economic consequences of the cost of the unprecedented arms build-up in the past
decades. The linkage between disarmament and development should remain in the focus of
deliberations during the current session.

Three immediate priorities during the coming year pertain to negotiations on a comprehensive
test-ban treaty, the speedy conclusion of chemical-weapons convention and the launching of
the second phase of reductions in strategic arms with the purpose of eliminating whole classes
of those weapons. All nuclear-weapon States must be involved in the negotiations for nuclear
disarmament and should be prepared to undertake obligations now. The international
community should call upon the nuclear- weapon States to abjure the use of nuclear weapons
through an international accord on the non-use of those weapons. Those measures, if they are
set in motion, would reflect the far-reaching changes in international relations.

Economic growth during the last year has shown a mixed record. The expansion of world
trade and output has begun to slow down. External and fiscal imbalances between the major
economies have continued, aggravating the uncertainties that face the developing countries.
Monetary instability and higher interest rates have added to the formidable economic problems
of those countries. The international economic environment has remained inhospitable, as
protectionism and discriminatory trade practices, inadequate financial flows, low commodity
prices and exclusion from international economic decision-making have conspired to make
developing countries insecure and vulnerable.

As I pointed out earlier, the Iraq-Kuwait crisis worsened this enfeeblement by raising oil
prices, interrupting oil supplies and, in general, handicapping growth efforts.

While new problems have arisen, long-standing ones, like external debt, continue to constrain
development prospects. Some welcome initiatives have been taken, but they do not appear to
be commensurate with the magnitude of the problem. Difficulties of many other countries have
been overlooked so far-pointing to the inescapable need for a comprehensive and durable
solution to the debt problem. Such a solution must include anticipatory measures to prevent
further proliferation of the problem to countries that, despite serious difficulties, are
continuing to service their debts.

An international development strategy for the next decade is currently being formulated. This
period will determine whether the world carries over into the twenty- first century the present
legacy of poverty, underdevelopment and stagnation, or whether it embarks on a more
productive era, aiming at qualitatively higher levels of human welfare, affording all countries
and all peoples an equitable opportunity to prosper in a stable and predictable external
environment. This guiding principle of international co-operation should underlie our efforts in
all the sectional areas of strategy. I hope that we shall be able to conclude negotiations
quickly, so that the international community may have before it a coherent and identifiable
framework of goals and objectives and a consistent set of policy measures to which all
countries stand committed.

The North-South dialogue, once nurtured by the international community, has fallen into a state
of neglect. It deserves to be revived. When political co-operation is on the upswing, why
should economic co-operation languish? The head and the limbs have to function together if
the body is to be strong. India has traditionally had the privilege, in this context, of working
with other countries to make a North-South compact real and forceful.

South-South co-operation to build up collective self-reliance is an important aspect of
international economic growth. The summit, in Kuala Lumpur in June this year, of 15
developing countries, including India, provided significant impetus to this process. Given the
political will, much more is possible, and much more should be the aim.

We are now less than 60 days away from the conclusion of the Uruguay Round. A great deal of
expectation has been aroused in these negotiations. We have been participating in good faith,
in the hope that the conclusions will assist in the development of the developing countries.
Despite very severe economic difficulties, many developing countries, including India, have
made offers to the limit of their capability. These offers are not, however, being
reciprocated-particularly the ones in respect of areas to which developing countries attach
importance, such as textiles, agriculture, tropical products and safeguards. It is difficult to
visualize a balanced outcome from the Uruguay Round without substantial progress in these
and other areas that are of greatest concern to developing countries.

Environmental concerns have-rightly-moved to the top of the international agenda. The United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development, to be held in Rio de Janeiro in June
1992, will be an event of great importance, focusing on the inescapable fact that protection of
the environment requires acceleration of development in the poorer countries.

At the heart of the environmental crisis lies the persistence of wide disparities, in levels of
production and consumption, between the developed and the developing countries. The very
high per capita consumption levels in the industrialised world impose a corresponding strain
on global natural resources and thus on the environment. On the other hand, extreme poverty in
the developing countries is itself a cause of environmental degradation. In order simply to
survive, poverty-stricken people are forced, for example, to cut down forests for firewood or
to overgraze pastures.

In the developing countries the environment cannot be protected unless the root cause of its
degradation-namely, poverty-is eradicated. Thus sustainable development calls for curbs on
extravagant life-styles in affluent countries and for the promotion of economic development in
less fortunate areas. I should like to add, as parenthesis, that the call for a change in life-styles
in affluent societies does not imply a reduction in living standards-indeed, it envisages an
improvement in the overall quality of life.

It is now accepted that environmental protection requires the provision of new and additional
funds for developing countries, as well as the transfer of environmentally benign technology to
these countries on a preferential basis. Any new environmental regulatory mechanisms should
be accompanied, from the outset, by full and adequate provision for funding the technology
transfer. This is an absolute requirement for effective action on the environment.

In conclusion, I wish to say that the issues of today are of the utmost importance. We have left
behind a long history and have crossed the threshold to another epoch. We have to put our
heads and hearts together to design a world of peace and development. We have to fashion the
United Nations to reflect the end of the cold war, making it responsive to the diversity of the
world community, and representative of world democracy and the equality of sovereign
nations. Let the new era usher in world peace and a global Fabric of co-operation. Let us all
work together towards that noble objective.

------------------------------------
Back to Statements in the United Nations