General Assembly Session 50 meeting 1

The President

First, I should like to express my profound gratitude for the honour the Assembly has bestowed on me by electing me President and for the confidence in me and my country that this election represents.

I am fully aware of the heavy burden and the tremendous responsibilities associated with the office of President of the United Nations General Assembly, but I am pleased that the Assembly has selected me for this office and wish to assure representatives that I am fully prepared to perform every duty that this office entails. All Member States and their representatives can count on me to be of use to them to the best of my ability and to make a real contribution to the effective functioning of the General Assembly and its subsidiary bodies.

I should also like to state at the outset that I personally intend to preside over the working groups, of which the President of the General Assembly serves ex officio as Chairman, on the understanding that those bodies are imbued with a general spirit of consensus and reform, which my participation might help to enhance.

I should like to express my gratitude and praise to the President of the forty-ninth session of the General Assembly, Mr. Amara Essy of Côte d'Ivoire, for his untiring efforts and complete dedication in performing the duties of his lofty post, for all his personal contributions to the smooth functioning of the General Assembly and, lastly, for the fact that he was the sponsor of the establishment, on 14 September 1995, of the important Working Group on the Strengthening of the United Nations System, whose relevance cannot be overemphasized. This is another working group the chairmanship of which has been assigned to me as from today, and I intend to preside personally over its deliberations.

I should now like to address the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, in order to express my great admiration for him and my satisfaction at the great prestige he deservedly enjoys throughout the world. Having taken up his difficult and demanding tasks at a particularly important time in the history of the United Nations, Mr. Boutros-Ghali has shown himself, throughout his term of office, to be not only an outstanding intellectual capable of theorizing and conceptualizing problems and of thinking before acting, but also a man of action capable of taking timely decisions on the most difficult issues that every day come before the chief executive of the United Nations. A tireless negotiator for peace and a steadfast promoter of development, Boutros Boutros-Ghali has carried out work that is outstanding in every respect and that continues to earn him our gratitude. I assure him that from this, the very first day of my term as President of the General Assembly, I shall give him my fullest and most loyal cooperation.

Finally, I should like to offer special greetings to all the Member countries of the United Nations, whatever their history, geographical location, traditions or form of government. I shall respect all of them in the same way, in strict observance of the principle of equality.

It is, in fact, not difficult for a Portuguese to respect, understand and have friendly feelings towards the most varied countries of the world. A seafaring people, a country of discoveries, a nation open to exchanges with diverse cultures and civilizations, Portugal has always been one of the first European States -- at times the very first -- to come into contact with all the other regions of the world. From the north and from the south we had our first encounters with Africa; travelling west, we arrived in the Americas and made contact with Brazil; in the Middle East, we left traces and vestiges that survive to this day; we had a presence in India, in Japan and throughout Asia, where our historical memory is still respected today.

We are therefore a people with a universal outlook, and over the past 500 years we have grown accustomed to taking a global view of world problems, life and mankind. Members can therefore count on a President who will not only respect each and every one of them but who, thanks to the historical and cultural traditions of his country, will find it easy to understand their differences, sensibilities and needs.

The five centuries of Portuguese travels throughout the world have had international consequences of the greatest importance. Today there is not just one country, but seven countries, whose official language is Portuguese. Portuguese is one of the world's major languages: it is spoken by approximately 200 million people, and, although only 10 million Portuguese live in Portugal, there are at least 4 million emigrants living abroad who have taken our culture and way of life to the four corners of the Earth and constitute the "Portuguese diaspora" of which we are so proud.

It is in homage to this reality, so rich and so vast, that I beg the Assembly's indulgence to use my mother tongue here for a moment to say:

(spoke in Portuguese; English text furnished by the President's Office)

On the occasion of the election, for the first time in 50 years, of a Portuguese to the office of President of the United Nations General Assembly, I should like to extend my most warm, friendly and fraternal greetings to the seven States Members of this Organization whose official language is Portuguese: Angola, Brazil, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Sao Tome and Principe and Portugal.

The President

In spite of the difficulties with which we are faced, the criticism that has been directed at us and the crises that we are experiencing -- one of which is particularly acute -- this is the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations, which gives us several important reasons to celebrate.

The League of Nations lasted little more than 20 years; the United Nations has now lasted half a century. The League of Nations did not manage to achieve its principal objective: to avoid the Second World War; the United Nations has managed to achieve its principal goal: to avoid a third world war. The League of Nations concentrated all its peacemaking efforts on disarmament; the United Nations understood from the start that disarmament, while very important, was not the only way to prevent war, and strengthened its collective security system with a range of policies for economic, social and educational development.

Our "founding fathers" were endowed with foresight: the establishment in 1945 of the United Nations represented great hope for all people of good will throughout the world. It is true that these past 50 years have not been marked exclusively by successes and victories. The existence of the United Nations, like that of any organization, has been marked by many errors and defeats. But was that not inevitable, given the very nature of human beings, society and the world as it is?

In this connection, I should like to quote a remark about the United Nations which I consider apposite. It was made by a great President of the United States, John F. Kennedy, who said in 1962:

The President

"Our instrument and our hope is the United Nations, and I see little merit in the impatience of those who would abandon this imperfect world instrument because they dislike our imperfect world."

The President

Today, after our Organization has been in existence 50 years, should our assessment of its activities be positive or negative? We are all well aware of the Organization's failures, especially its most recent ones. And the critics have not ceased their criticism. So, in the interest of balance, it is only fair to enumerate the main achievements of the United Nations.

The first, to which I have already spoken, but to which I wish to return because of its exceptional importance and which can never be stressed too much, is the following: the United Nations succeeded in avoiding what many deemed inevitable -- the outbreak of a third world war. Although this result cannot be ascribed solely to the United Nations, the Organization did play a primary role in the prevention of armed East-West conflict which would have been fatal for mankind.

Three very important elements demonstrate that the international community has rightfully valued the actions carried out by the United Nations over the last 50 years. First, five Nobel prizes were awarded to the Organizations or to one of its elements. Secondly, the number of Member States has increased from 51 in 1945 to 185 in 1995. The fact that this number has more than tripled is because the great majority of countries of the world believe that the United Nations has more qualities and advantages than flaws and drawbacks. Thirdly, a decision was taken to hold in October a large meeting with the participation of more than 150 Heads of State or Government from the entire world. And, indeed, it is obvious that if so many outstanding leaders have decided to come to New York to commemorate a mere anniversary, it is because this anniversary is unquestionably the occasion for celebrating a series of important events.

I have already spoken of that global peace which fortunately has been maintained successfully for some 50 years now despite numerous local or regional conflicts which it has been impossible to avoid. But here, even in that difficult area or war and peace, the United Nations can pride itself on having made a decisive contribution to noticeable progress in the fields of disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation, and of having conducted negotiations and concluded agreements within the framework of the peace process for which the outcome was positive as, for example, in Cambodia, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Eritrea, Mozambique and, we hope, also in Angola.

Secondly, the United Nations more than any other institution has contributed to establishing and attempting to guarantee in practice the primacy of international law, and it is well known that, without a state of law, a human being cannot know that peace, freedom or security which allows him to lead a normal existence in a civilized society. We will never forget the nightmare of "man who is a wolf to man" described with insight in the "state of nature" of the Leviathan of Thomas Hobbes. And, in speaking of the contribution of the United Nations to the recognition of the primacy of international law, I wish to hail the outstanding action and lofty prestige achieved by one of its major bodies, the International Court of Justice, to which I wish to pay a very sincere tribute.

Thirdly, also to the credit of the United Nations is the attention and importance which it attaches to human rights. It is the United Nations which has universalized them; it is the United Nations which has led States to accept, through the recognition of human rights, the fact that the State is at the service of man and not man at the service of the State. It is the United Nations which, not limiting itself to those classical human rights born of the American and the French revolutions, consecrated the fundamental rights of the second generation and, in particular, economic, social and cultural rights which allowed it to enrich the contribution of liberalism of the century of enlightenment through the contribution of democratic socialism of the nineteenth century. And, once again, it is the United Nations which today is playing a leading role in the struggle for the respect of the fundamental rights of the third generation -- in particular, rights dealing with the protection of nature and of the environment, an area in which, for the first time in the history of mankind, it is no longer exclusively a question of recognizing or establishing rights governing the relations of human beings among themselves or vis-à-vis the State, but also to attempt to establish and implement machinery which will lead to the recognition of the rights of animals and of nature in the face of acts of aggression perpetrated by the human being himself.

While I do not wish to dwell in detail on this subject, I must nevertheless emphasize at this solemn moment that I consider -- as, to be sure, do all honest and civilized individuals -- a major reason for pride and satisfaction the fact that it has been possible, once again thanks to the United Nations, to draw up and implement international conventions which do honour to mankind and which will form glorious landmarks in the history of the first 50 years of the Organization and will rank among its justified achievements. I am thinking ,in particular, of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women, and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. What would mankind be without these basic texts? Would they ever have been produced without the intervention of the United Nations?

It is the United Nations to which we owe the contribution to universal awareness of the idea that our world is formed of equal beings all enjoying the same fundamental rights to human dignity. This ideal is already long-standing. Saint Paul affirmed that with the "new man" ... "there is neither Greek nor Jew, ... barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free" (The Holy Bible, Colossians 3:10-11). But while that ideal is indeed an ancient one, nevertheless 20 centuries were required to enshrine it in a legal declaration of universal scope and here the credit is due to the United Nations. That ideal must never be forgotten nor must we fail to mention it, whether or not we adhere to the religious tradition of which it was born.

Fourthly, the United Nations certainly has the right to claim the major credit linked with two other victories won by mankind in the twentieth century, namely, decolonization and the end of apartheid. The fact that the number of States Members of the Organization has increased from 51 to 185 is due basically to decolonization, which reflected in facts the principle of the right of peoples to self-determination stated in Article I of the Charter. And the fact is that if an end was put to the unacceptable regime in South Africa this is in great part due to the condemnations and criticisms levelled by the United Nations in application of the second paragraph of the Preamble and of Article 55 (c) of the Charter.

It is interesting to emphasize that the leaders who succeeded in bringing about decolonization, like those who put an end to apartheid, had the most wide-ranging political convictions, a fact which clearly demonstrates that the ideals enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations are neither partisan nor ideological, nor religious, but purely and simply humanitarian, and that it suffices to believe in the dignity of all human beings and to respect it in practice in order to be a law-abiding and consistent Member of the United Nations.

My country, Portugal, was one of the last European countries to decolonize, a task it completed when democracy replaced the dictatorship that had governed us for 50 years. The imperatives of our decolonization were national, of course, but that obligation, as we see it, also flowed from the Charter of the United Nations and many resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council.

In the specific case of East Timor -- and aware of the duty of impartiality incumbent upon me as President of the General Assembly -- allow me to express hope for the success of the mission of mediation and good offices that the General Assembly has expressly entrusted to the Secretary-General. He has my full confidence in regard to the efforts he will continue to make to solve this question through dialogue between Portugal and Indonesia, with respect for the Charter of the United Nations.

Fifthly, the United Nations has contributed, especially since the end of the cold war, to consolidating and concretizing the process of internal democratization on which many countries have embarked, countries that have decided of their own will to move from a one-party regime to a multi-party system. It is not for the United Nations to dictate to a Member State the form of government the latter must adopt in its political constitution. On the other hand, the United Nations can and must assist those who decide on their own to embark upon a process of democratization. This is what it has done to this very day in more than 45 countries, providing assistance not only in the electoral sphere but in other fields as well. Those who are convinced, as I am, of the superiority of the pluralistic democratic model must stress this fact and welcome it.

Sixthly -- and lastly -- I should like to draw attention to one of the most relevant and positive aspects of the United Nations, one which in most cases the Organization's detractors, and even impartial observers, frequently overlook. Here, I am referring to the outstandingly commendable part played by a large number of autonomous United Nations agencies and bodies in promoting the economic, social and cultural development of the poorest and most disadvantaged of the world's peoples.

For example, would not the world situation be far more serious and terrible, far more dishonourable for all of us, if the World Health Organization (WHO) were not combating age-old diseases; if the International Labour Organization (ILO) were not working to improve conditions in the workplace; if the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) were not here to ensure respect for the rights and well-being of children, to whom we must provide all we can since they represent the future of mankind; if the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) did not engage in a campaign against illiteracy and did not dedicate itself to improving the cultural, scientific and educational level of developing countries; if the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees did not exist and did not deal with those who suddenly find themselves, through no fault of their own, families without homes, without jobs and without food, those whose situation is one of our era's greatest tragedies?

In short, notwithstanding the many errors and setbacks that have studded the 50 years of existence of the United Nations -- inevitable in the history of any institution and any individual -- there have at the same time been many achievements, successes and victories that must be credited to the Organization.

The millions of dead and deprived will attest forever to our shortcomings. We must honour their memory and lament the fact that we were not able or did not manage to do more to save them.

It is, however, true that millions of human beings, and perhaps even more, constitute before our very eyes irrefutable evidence and clear proof of United Nations successes. For each human being who has not died of a disease that has been eradicated thanks to the work of the WHO, for each worker who, because of an ILO convention, has not lost his job or been mistreated, for each child who has received some assistance and tender care from UNICEF, for each woman and each man who has learned to read and has gained access to the treasures of culture through a programme of UNESCO, for each family, finally, that has been given a roof, an article of clothing or a meal from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, it is not only the United Nations that has honoured its commitments and justified its existence but mankind as well that has been enriched, that has been ennobled, that has been enhanced because someone has chosen, on its behalf, to do good in a disinterested way, without seeking anything in return.

Let us therefore pay tribute to the founders of the United Nations -- and to all who have kept it alive so far -- for having managed to create and preserve the splendid work of human solidarity it represents, notwithstanding all its defects.

During the first 50 years of its existence the United Nations has been the birthplace, the depository and the catalyst of the very great progress achieved in the areas of law, peace and security, development, international cooperation, human rights, environmental protection and the enhancement of the human person, of his dignity and well-being. May it continue to be so, at the very least in as active a manner as in the past, in the 50 years to come.

The President

Looking back over the past we can conclude, I think fairly and impartially, that in its first 50 years of existence the United Nations has given a positive performance which should be commended and celebrated.

I am well aware, however, as surely we all are, that there are many matters to be reviewed, many errors to be corrected and many reforms to be undertaken.

It is not for me personally to decide what must be done or to present a programme of reforms to the General Assembly, which is sovereign in such matters.

Yet the members of the Assembly would surely find it strange if, in my inaugural address, I only spoke glowingly of the past without saying anything about the problems of the present and the prospects for the future.

The bipolar world characterized by the East-West confrontation, the global nuclear threat and the systematic paralysis of the Security Council, in the context of a cold-war scenario which several attempts at detente never succeeded in eliminating, has come to an end. A new international order has gradually begun to take shape, but its form is still vague, confused and imprecise. If the Congress of Vienna was the swift response to the end of the Napoleonic wars, if the League of Nations was the possible response to the end of the First World War and if the United Nations was the appropriate response to the end of the Second World War, then what is -- or what ought to be -- the necessary response to the end of the cold war and of the bipolar nuclear confrontation of the past 50 years?

That is the main problem that all the world's countries must try to solve. For the problem does exist, but it has not yet been solved.

Now that the utopias which promised "the end of history" have been quickly proved to be unrealistic, as have the easy illusions engendered by the rapid and efficient conclusion of the Gulf War, the harsh reality of international life in all of its Hobbesian brutishness has demonstrated that the new international order has yet to be devised, that peace has yet to be consolidated, that flare-ups of radical nationalism have yet to be brought under control, and that respect for human rights has yet to be guaranteed in many parts of the world. The United Nations, now released from the impasse into which the East-West conflict had driven it, is being held responsible by many, not only for those things that it can do and is not doing, but also for those things which it cannot or should not do but which many people erroneously think it has an obligation to do.

Those who think this way obviously forget that the United Nations cannot be asked to do what it cannot deliver; that our Organization is governed by a Charter whose principles cannot be violated; and that the United Nations has always been, is now and always will be what its Member States want or allow it to be.

What are we to think of all this?

I speak in my personal capacity, and the views I am expressing today are solely my own. But I will not hesitate to say, frankly and straightforwardly, what I think about some of the problems and difficulties which we are facing at present and which will probably dominate our agenda during the next few decades. I will summarize my position in the following 12 points:

First, the United Nations has ceased to be an intergovernmental organization with a limited membership and has become the only international organization that is universal. Efforts must be made to ensure that all States that are not yet Members should seek to be admitted in the near future. For the same reason, the most serious penalty imposed on a Member State should never be expulsion, but rather suspension, for the United Nations must, as a matter of principle, include all the world's countries.

Second, the new international order that is to be built, now that the cold war and the East-West confrontation are over, must not leave out the United Nations, either by replacing it with some new, radically different organization or by doing away entirely with any international organization of a universal nature. The United Nations, with its essential features, must therefore be preserved, although it can and should be reformed where it is shown to be faulty, inefficient or out of tune with current conditions.

Third, the year 1995 to 1996, which coincides with the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, is an especially appropriate time to reflect upon the Organization and to bring to completion or initiate the most important reforms of which it stands in need. The spirit of reform can be created and sustained during this fiftieth session of the Assembly, but if we fail to seize this opportunity, the occasion may be lost for many years to come. I am prepared, for my part, to do everything I can to make the needed reforms a reality, according to the wishes of the General Assembly and the Member States.

Fourth, the revision of some Articles and provisions of the Charter of the United Nations is, I believe, a timely and necessary task. I do not think, however, that this needs to be done all at once. An incremental approach may be preferable, provided that consistency is maintained among the different reforms.

Fifth, the United Nations is a legal entity with the nature of an association. The general principles of law governing associations must therefore be reaffirmed and observed with regard to the United Nations. It should be remembered that with the United Nations, as with any other association, those who join do so voluntarily, and if they do not leave it is because they do not wish to do so. Thus, each Member State, as long as it retains its status as a Member, must be able to enjoy all its rights as long as it fulfils all its duties, and should be required to fulfil all its duties in order to enjoy all its rights.

Sixth, one of the peremptory rules of the Charter is the duty of all Member States to pay their annual assessments, as determined by the General Assembly, to defray the expenses of the Organization. If all Member States meet this obligation in a timely manner, the United Nations will never have to face any financial crisis, although occasional problems may be encountered. Consequently, any Member in arrears in the payment of its assessments must bear the appropriate consequences; otherwise, the principle of the equality of all Members would be violated and the proper functioning of the Organization would be placed in jeopardy. This rule must be applied to all Member States, from the biggest to the smallest, from the most powerful to the weakest.

Seventh, another absolute obligation of any member of any organization is to abide faithfully by the rules of law applicable to it. If disagreements arise concerning the interpretation or application of these rules, the principle of the separation of powers requires that they should be settled impartially by a court of law. The Charter of the United Nations provides for such a judicial body: the International Court of Justice. In my view, it is therefore utterly desirable for all countries that are Members of the United Nations to accept, within a relatively short time, the jurisdiction of the Court at The Hague. That it should still be possible to refuse the Court's jurisdiction strikes me as an anachronism left over from the days of unlimited State sovereignty, which is inconsistent with the prevailing principle of the primacy of international law.

Eighth, the spectacular growth in the number of States Members of the United Nations has had its proper and appropriate impact on the General Assembly, but the same is not true of the Security Council, which does not adequately reflect the political, economic, demographic and national realities of today's world. Reform of the Security Council is therefore required and urgent, but it cannot be carried out if national selfishness or domestic electoral considerations in Member countries are superimposed on the necessary spirit of cooperation and consensus.

Ninth, the United Nations can and must make a serious effort to be less expensive and more efficient. Recourse to outside bodies for advice on the most appropriate ways to achieve those goals should not be ruled out, as it does not offend the sovereignty of Member States or the decision-making powers that belong to the General Assembly or the Secretary-General. In that regard a number of basic truths must be kept in mind: first, only with the good will and determination of the General Assembly will it be possible to take the necessary steps to eliminate the many subcommissions and working groups which overlap, resulting in duplication or triplication or which, quite simply, no longer serve any purpose; secondly, Member States should be reminded, with respect to the difficult decisions which the Secretary-General must take in this respect, that in accordance with Article 100, paragraph 2, of the Charter,

"Each Member of the United Nations undertakes to respect the exclusively international character of the responsibilities of the Secretary-General ... and not to seek to influence [him] in the discharge of [his] responsibilities."

Tenth, it is said that the United Nations costs too much and that drastic reductions are needed in its staff and budget. I do not question the possibility and desirability of cutting costs and achieving increased productivity: in any organization that is practicable and, every so often, even necessary. I should like, however, to remind everyone -- solely in order to ensure that we do not lose touch with reality -- that the current annual budget of the United Nations (excluding the peace-keeping operations) is $1.3 billion, which is about 25 per cent of the current annual budget of $5 billion of Portugal's Ministry of Education. If we bear in mind that Portugal is a country with a population of only 10 million and that the United Nations is a very large and complex world Organization, we will perhaps have a somewhat more realistic view of the question whether the United Nations is as expensive as some people claim, when it spends only one quarter of the current budget of Portugal's Ministry of Education.

Eleventh, what are truly expensive are peace-keeping operations, which have increased considerably in recent times. Suffice it to point out that 10 years ago there were 4,000 Blue Helmets serving around the world, while today there are around 70,000. Obviously, there is a financial problem here. But the main question, as everyone will appreciate, is not financial but rather a matter of general policy: How interventionist should the United Nations be with respect to peace-keeping operations? Should it intervene whenever it is desirable or only when it is strictly necessary and feasible? Should the Organization confine itself to peace-keeping or should it get involved in peace enforcement as well? Should it intervene directly or through regional organizations and multinational forces? And when it is asked to dispatch its Blue Helmets, should it agree to do so only when effective conditions for their security and self-defence have been or can be guaranteed -- as seems obvious to me -- or should it be allowed to send Blue Helmets to become scapegoats for disagreements between Member States and the inability of some Member States to take the necessary decisions?

These are the major issues in the area of peace-keeping operations which the United Nations -- that is, the States Members of the United Nations -- must address and resolve. The financial issues are by definition secondary and may even prove easier to solve if the prior political questions have been satisfactorily dealt with.

Allow me at this point to pay a most heartfelt tribute to all those Blue Helmets who have served or are serving under the United Nations flag, who have demonstrated or are currently demonstrating their military dedication, and who in some cases have given their very lives for the ideals which all countries should share but which, shamefully, are flouted by some.

Twelfth, the United Nations does not -- as everyone knows -- exist solely for the purpose of guaranteeing peace and security; it also exists to promote the development of the less developed countries and to ensure the observance of generally accepted universal values, such as "human rights", public health and the protection of the environment and nature. It is essential, in my opinion, that the objective of peace and security should not diminish the importance or obscure the objective of development. It is essential not to repeat the error of the League of Nations. It is essential to continue, as we are doing today, to spend a larger share of the United Nations budget on development assistance than on support for peace-keeping operations. As Pope Paul VI stated,

"Development is the new name for peace."

Without development there can be no peace -- at least not the just and lasting peace to which all men and women of good will aspire. In my personal opinion, the fight against poverty, disease, ignorance and all the sufferings that place men beneath the minimum level required for the dignity of the human person must be our principal commitment for the twenty-first century.

These are the 12 points that I feel are most important when thinking about the needed reform of the United Nations. But as I have said, it is not a programme, or even a proposal: it is only my personal vision. It is for you, the representatives, and the Governments that you represent here, to put forward proposals, to discuss the issues and to take decisions.

I hope that we will all be able to continue to move forward with a comprehensive vision towards a broad community of values, principles and attitudes that will make it possible to take the decisions and measures for reforming and strengthening the United Nations, with the aim of ensuring the peaceful coexistence and equitable development of all the world's peoples.

I thank you for the attention with which you have listened to me. We shall begin straight away to work to ensure that this fiftieth session of the United Nations General Assembly shall be an important landmark in the history of the Organization.

Let us all allow ourselves to be caught up in the spirit of the fiftieth anniversary and to draw from that spirit the inspiration and the good will that will enable us to tackle the issues, to reach agreements, to adopt resolutions and, above all, to implement in good time the reforms that are so urgently needed.

Let us not be afraid of discussion, dialogue, or the clash of ideas and proposals. Let us not be afraid either of negotiation, of the spirit of compromise or of the building of consensus. In the pursuit of these goals members can count at all times on the President of the General Assembly whom they have elected today.

In its new President, the General Assembly -- and every Member State -- will always find a man of tolerance, a man of dialogue and a man of hope: hope for a better world through peace, freedom, justice, education, health and development. Let us strive together -- we who call ourselves the United Nations -- to ensure through our united efforts that next year, at the close of the fiftieth session of the General Assembly, which is beginning now, the world will be a somewhat better place than it is today.