GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS INCLUSION OF TWO NEW ITEMS IN ASSEMBLY AGENDA

Press Release
GA/9485

GENERAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS INCLUSION OF TWO NEW ITEMS IN ASSEMBLY AGENDA

The General Committee this morning decided to recommend the inclusion of two new items in the agenda of the current General Assembly session, as follows: dialogue among civilizations; and armed aggression against the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The new items will be taken up at a date to be announced in plenary meetings.

Introducing his proposal, the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo said the armed aggression against his country had caused human, social, economic and environmental damage, and had had a negative impact on its democratization process. For the sake of the credibility of the United Nations, he hoped the Committee would authorize the item's inclusion, and respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Speaking before action, the representative of Uganda said that initiatives were being taken by regional organizations, including the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC), to solve the problem peacefully. Those initiatives should be given a chance before a debate in the plenary was taken up on the issue, because such a debate would undermine the process already under way. He asked the Committee to take a decision at a later date.

The representatives of Lesotho, Rwanda and Mexico also made statements regarding that item.

Introducing the item on dialogue among civilizations, the representative of Iran said that the essence of the proposal reflected a genuine wish of the international community to encourage recourse to dialogue instead of conflict. The United Nations should have a central role in the promotion of dialogue among civilizations and cultures, which was significant for promoting peace, rejecting force and enhancing understanding in cultural, economic and political fields.

All speakers on that item supported the proposal saying that dialogue among civilizations and cultures should be the accepted mode of interaction and settlement of differences. The representatives of Italy, India, Senegal, Russian Federation, Syria, Lesotho, Armenia and Mongolia also made statements.

The report of the General Committee on action taken at today's meeting will be considered by the Assembly plenary on Monday, 26 October, at 10 a.m.

Committee Work Programme

The General Committee met this morning to consider requests for the inclusion of two additional items in the Assembly's agenda for the current session.

The Committee had before it a letter from the Permanent Representative of Iran, requesting the inclusion of a new item, entitled dialogue among civilizations (document A/53/233) on the agenda. The request is accompanied by an explanatory memorandum and a draft resolution entitled United Nations year of dialogue among civilizations.

The memorandum says that, "to ensure that man will never again resort to hostility and conflict as a means to achieve objectives", the international community should underline the imperative of dialogue as the accepted mode of interaction and settlement of differences.

The United Nations should have the central role in the promotion of dialogue among civilizations and cultures, the memorandum continues. It is on that basis that the President of Iran, Seyed Mohammad Khatami, suggested the item be included on the agenda of current Assembly session, and that a resolution be adopted in the course of the session designating 2001 as the United Nations year of dialogue among civilizations. The designation of such a year would provide governments and relevant international and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) with an opportunity to plan and implement appropriate cultural, educational and social programmes to promote the concept.

By the terms of the draft resolution, the Assembly would decide to designate the year 2001 as the United nations year of dialogue among civilizations. It would invite governments and relevant international organizations and NGOs to plan and implement appropriate cultural, educational and social programmes to promote the concept of dialogue among civilizations through conferences, seminars and the dissemination of information and scholarly material on the subject. They would also inform the Secretary- General of their activities. He would be asked to present a provisional report on related activities to the Assembly at its fifty-fifth session.

The Assembly also had before it a letter (document A/53/232) from the Permanent Representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, requesting the inclusion of a new item, entitled the armed aggression against the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in the Assembly's current agenda. The request is accompanied by an explanatory memorandum, which states that on 2 August, the coalition troops of Rwanda and Uganda invaded the Democratic Republic of the Congo. That aggression, which violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a Member of the United Nations, had the immediate effect of sowing death and devastation throughout the Congolese territory.

General Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/9485 3rd Meeting (AM) 23 October 1998

The international community is called on to take all measures to restore peace and security, which are threatened in the Central African region by the Rwandan-Ugandan aggression, the memorandum goes on. The Democratic Republic of the Congo urges the United Nations to issue a strong condemnation of Rwanda and Uganda to thwart the irredentist designs of those two countries, and put an end to the cultures of impunity and genocide that they are spreading throughout Central Africa.

Statements

MONGA MAKONGA (Democratic Republic of the Congo) said that in the spirit of rule 15 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, he was requesting to add the item entitled armed aggression against the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the Assembly's current agenda. Stating that acts had been committed by neighbouring countries, he gave a historical background of the crisis.

He said the present crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was regional in nature, and the United Nations should try to prevent or solve such crises. There were armed foreign troops in Congolese territory. Rwanda and Uganda were occupying territory in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Rwandan soldiers had used heavy artillery to attack Kinshasa. On 13 August, the eastern province of the country was surrounded by Ugandan troops. Since then, several fronts had been opened and towns taken by Ugandan troops.

The harm to the Democratic Republic of the Congo had been human, social, economic and environmental, he said. There had been assassination of more than 200 intellectuals, rape, summary executions, enormous loss of life and material damage. On 11 October, the aggressors shot down a civilian aircraft. The grim list just presented had had a negative impact on the process of democratization in his country.

He stressed that his country had never had genocidal feelings against anyone. It had welcomed and taken in Rwandan refugees, who spent exiled time in Kinshasa. For the sake of the credibility of the United Nations, he hoped the Committee would authorize the inclusion of the item in the plenary's agenda. He appealed to the Committee to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of his country. The Democratic Republic of the Congo would work to promote a culture of peace in the subregion.

MATIA MULUMBA SEMAKULA KIWANUKA (Uganda) said that since the beginning of 1998, almost 70 per cent of the time of the Security Council had been taken up by items concerning Africa, which was very unfortunate. The whole African region was concerned about developments in the region of the Great Lakes. African organizations, including the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC), were trying to solve the problem peacefully. African heads of States had also met in search of a

General Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/9485 3rd Meeting (AM) 23 October 1998

solution, and other initiatives had also taken place, for the developments in the Democratic Republic of the Congo were important to all the African nations.

Uganda had been accused of aggression against its neighbour, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, he continued. In fact, Uganda did play a role in assisting Kabila to assume power. Kabila had asked Uganda and the United Republic of Tanzania to train civilian police and his army. Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo signed a protocol whereby Uganda would station its troops on the eastern border of the Congo with Uganda, because that border was being used by forces which were trying to destabilize the situation in Uganda. Atrocities in that area were well known, and their list was very long. Uganda had a legitimate right to protect its borders. It did not deny the fact that its forces were stationed on the border with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which did not have the capacity to station troops in its various corners. In view of the initiatives undertaken by the region and in view of the fact that Uganda -- the so called aggressor -- had agreed to the proposals of various regions, the initiative of African countries should be allowed to take place.

The recent African Summit had called for an immediate cessation of hostilities and a ceasefire, adequate measures to address the security concerns of different countries, an orderly withdrawal of foreign troops, dialogue between the parties and institution of a new international force under the auspices of the OAU, he said. Uganda had agreed to all that. There had been diplomatic initiatives by Nelson Mandela and other leaders. The Democratic Republic of the Congo had asked for the inclusion of the item, and every country had a right to ask for the inscription of an item. In situations like that, all the parties concerned were encouraged to have consultations. The Security Council met on the issue yesterday, and its initiatives should be allowed to function. They should be given a chance before a debate in the plenary was taken up on the issue, because such a debate would undermine the process under way. That was his plea.

Mr. MAKONGA (Democratic Republic of the Congo) said he wanted to put an end to the conflict as soon as possible. The representative of Uganda referred to the protocol signed by the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda, but he was the only one familiar with that. That agreement no longer had force of law in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The presence of Ugandan troops on the territory of his country was subsequent to that agreement. It was only natural that his country contact organizations that had authority beyond the African territory to solve the conflict. He could not wait until regional initiatives played out. The initiatives taken here did not go against what was being done on the African continent. The Ugandan representative recognized the presence of Ugandan troops in the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. If he was to wait until all that played out, he asked whether Uganda would withdraw its troops. The Committee would be helpful if it allowed the item to be taken up in the plenary.

General Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/9485 3rd Meeting (AM) 23 October 1998

DIDIER OPERTTI (Uruguay), Chairman of the General Committee, said that given the circumstances and the fact that the Committee had only heard two views on the matter, he invited other members to speak out and help the Chair interpret those views.

Mr. SEMAKULA KIWANUKA (Uganda) said that he had put forward a proposal that the item, in view of the initiative in the region and the concern of the whole continent, be inscribed on the agenda of the plenary. As to the question of the time of such a discussion, it should take place after consultations between all the parties concerned. He thought that the Committee should wait with its decision.

PERCY METSING MANGOAELA (Lesotho) said that it was his understanding that it was a sovereign right of a country to request the inscription of an item. The Democratic Republic of the Congo, which had asked for the inscription, had a right to do so. In view of Uganda's previous statement, it seemed that there was no divergence of opinion regarding the inscription.

Mr. MAKONGA (Democratic Republic of the Congo) said that he wanted clarification regarding the time of discussion on the new item.

Mr. SEMAKULA KIWANUKA (Uganda) said that the question raised by the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo was quite understandable, but it was equally important to find a peaceful solution of the problem. The search for such a solution was under way. He called on the Committee to give a chance to the African initiatives. After the consultations between the parties concerned, the question of the time of the debate could be discussed.

Mr. MAKONGA (Democratic Republic of the Congo) said that his delegation was asking for the inscription because it wanted the new issue to be discussed in the plenary. The initiatives could not resolve themselves before the matter was discussed in the plenary. His country had the right to ask for a discussion when it thought it necessary.

GIDEON KAYINAMURA (Rwanda) asked for guidance regarding the rules of procedure of the General Committee. He wanted to know how the decisions by the Committee were reached.

PABLO MACEDO (Mexico) said that he had listened very attentively to all the arguments and had come to the conclusion that the decision of the Committee should be limited to the inclusion of the item, but not to the time of its discussion. The first decision should be taken today, and the question of the time of discussion should be decided later.

Mr. OPERTTI (Uruguay), Chairman of the Committee, said that there was no disagreement on including the item proposed by the Democratic Republic of the Congo. So, there was no need to debate that point. The only outstanding

General Committee - 6 - Press Release GA/9485 3rd Meeting (AM) 23 October 1998

point was when the item should be taken up. The main thing was to settle the question of inclusion and not decide on the date at the present time. If there were no objections, the Committee would decide to include the item and the Chair would decide on a date at a later time.

The Committee then decided to include the item, entitled armed aggression against the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in the agenda of the Assembly's current session.

Introducing the item on dialogue among civilizations, SEYED MOHAMMAD HADI NEJAD HOSSEINIAN (Iran) said that the essence of the proposal for inclusion of the item reflected a genuine wish of the international community to encourage recourse to dialogue instead of conflict. The United Nations should have a central role in the promotion of dialogue among civilizations and cultures. The acceptance of that idea was significant for the promotion of peace, rejection of force and enhancement of understanding in the cultural, economic and political fields.

He also drew the Committee's attention to the draft resolution on the proposed item, which appeared in Annex II to the document before the Committee. Once the item had been adopted and taken up for consideration in plenary, his delegation stood willing and ready to engage in consultation with other concerned delegations on the wording of the draft.

MAURO POLITI (Italy) said his country attached great importance to dialogue among civilizations. It was convinced that dialogue was the best way to enhance peace and cooperation among peoples. He was in favour of including the item for the reasons expressed in the memorandum. Italy also supported the draft resolution, which was annexed to the document, especially operative paragraph 2, which would designate the year 2001 as the United Nations year of dialogue among civilizations.

SATYABRATA PAL (India) said his country supported Iran's proposal for the inclusion of the item. Today, many nations were left with their cultural values which defined them. One of the pegs that international relations could be hung on in the coming century was civilizational values. The dangers of conflict would always be there. India was glad to support the proposal.

IBRA DEGUENE KA (Senegal) said the use of dialogue, coupled with the patient desire to arrive at a solution to problems, was also the leitmotif of the foreign policy of his Government. The United Nations likewise should promote a universal civilization which would be the fruitful symbiosis of all civilizations. His delegation supported the initiative by Iran which was in keeping with the concerns of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the Non-Aligned Movement and the United Nations. His country also supported operative paragraph 2 of the draft resolution which proclaimed the year 2001 as the year of dialogue among civilizations.

General Committee - 7 - Press Release GA/9485 3rd Meeting (AM) 23 October 1998

YURIY V. FEDOTOV (Russian Federation) said his delegation supported the initiative put forward by Iran. It was both timely and fully in keeping with the basic purposes and principles of the United Nations. It would be most useful to have a thorough discussion of the issue. He welcomed the invitation of Iran to engage in consultations on the draft resolution.

KHALIL ABOU-HADID (Syria) said his delegation wished to express appreciation to Iran for the introduction of the new agenda item on dialogue among civilizations -- incisive dialogue among civilizations was commendable. The support for the proposal by a great number of countries within the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the Non-Aligned Movement reflected the importance of the issue which was also congruent with the principles of the United Nations. His delegation supported the inclusion of the new item in the agenda of the present session of the Assembly.

Mr. MANGOAELA (Lesotho) said his delegation was very active at the Non- Aligned Movement debate in Durban, South Africa, on the item on the dialogue among civilizations, which was subsequently adopted by the Movement. His country had reservations about the issue in Durban which were practical. It did not see merit in declarations that would just form part of a large repository of other pious declarations. Lesotho believed more in a declaration that would lead to realistic consequences and was pleased that Iran had pushed it through to a practical conclusion. Lesotho supported the issue wholeheartedly. It had one reservation to the draft on the operative paragraph calling for the year 2001 as a year of dialogue. While a century of dialogue was probably optimum, he felt that a decade of dialogue was preferable to just one year.

MOVSES ABELIAN (Armenia) said his delegation fully supported the initiative of Iran to include the proposed new item on the agenda of the fifty-third session of the Assembly. It also supported the draft resolution.

JARGALSAIKHANY ENKHSAIKHAN (Mongolia) expressed full support for the Iranian initiative and its inclusion on the agenda of the fifty-third session of the Assembly. His delegation also agreed with the gist of the draft resolution.

The General Committee then decided to include the item on the agenda of the fifty-third session of the Assembly.

Speaking after action, Mr. NEJAD HOSSEINIAN (Iran) expressed his appreciation to the Committee for its support of the proposal and said that his country was ready to start consultations on the newly included item.

* *** *