of debate took place on the proposed International Development Strategy for the 1980's, the preparation for the 1980 special session, and proposed global negotiations. Major issues in this debate include the so-called impasse in the North-South dialog on the creation of NIEO, the scope and substance of the global negotiations, and the proper forum for these negotiations. The view of the Third World is that little or no progress in establishing NIEO has been achieved because the Northern industrial democracies "don't want progress." The OECD states, including the United States, however, insist that considerable progress has been made such as the establishment and initial $1 billion financing of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); liberalization of international trade; increases in the levels of bilateral and multilateral assistance programs of the World Bank and regional development banks; the expansion of IMF facilities (the Trust Fund, the Extended Finance Facility, the Supplementary Financing Facility and the liberalization of the Compensatory Finance Facility); the anticipated conclusion of an agreement on the Common Fund for Commodities; and the agreements reached at Vienna at the U.N. Conference on Science and Technology for Development. Moreover, the United States made clear in its statement that it is committed to participating in the preparations for the global negotiations that are to take place on COW in 1980. If in this preparatory stage, sufficient progress is made in defining the specifics of the negotiations, the United States will participate in the 1980 special session. The United States and the Group of 77 have different views on the scope and substance of the global negotiations. During the 34th UNGA, the United States maintained that the Group of 77 should define specific topics to be negotiated and limit the scope to manageable proportions. In this regard, the United States also favors carrying on negotiations on specific topics within already existing international institutions rather than creating new institutions for this purpose. That is, discussions on international monetary reform should be dealt with in the IMF, and those on trade take place in the GATT. In contrast, the Group of 77 maintains that the negotiations should focus on trade, monetary and financial reform, food policies, and energy, but could not be specific about the parameters of such negotiations. The upshot was that the General Assembly adopted by consensus a resolution sponsored by the Group of 77 and introduced by India on "Global Negotiations related to International Economic Cooperation for Development." 26 This called for a round of global negotiations on economic cooperation to commence at the 1980 UNGA special session. It decided that these negotiations should deal with raw materials, energy, trade, development, money, and finance and contribute to implementing an international development strategy for the third U.N. development decade and it called on the COW to be the preparatory committee for the negotiations and commence its work in early 1980. The United States and other Western states joined the consensus on this resolution but in doing so the United States reiterated displeasure with a preambular paragraph that states that "limited progress (in reaching NIEO goals) has been achieved because of the absence 26 A. Res. 34/138. of genuine political will on the part of a large majority of developed countries to engage in meaningful negotiations." In the U.S. view, considerable, but not enough, progress has been made to achieve the international economic system that would best serve the interests of all nations, including the United States. No group of countries, said the United States, has made the greatest effort to produce an improved international economic system. Besides its decision on global negotiations, the Assembly also adopted resolutions calling on U.N. members, especially the developed states and international organizations, to increase assistance to the least developed, the land-locked developing countries, developing island countries, and those most seriously affected by current economic crises.27 The Assembly also adopted a resolution inviting the IMF and its development committee to examine the Outline for a Program of Action on International Monetary Reform and report on progress on such reform at the 1980 regular session of the General Assembly. It also referred to a resolution of UNCTAD which established an ad hoc intergovernmental high level group of experts on the future evolution of the international monetary system and requested this group to also report to the 1980 General Assembly session.28 In other resolutions, the 34th Assembly postponed a decision on the expansion of the Economic and Social Council and the restructuring of its subsidiary bodies, but adopted resolutions on providing assistance to various U.N. members, including Ethiopia, Yugoslavia, Sao Tome and Principe, Mozambique, the Seychelles, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Botswana, Guinea-Bissau, the Comoros, Dominica, Tonga, Lesotho, Cape Verde, Zambia, Uganda, Palestinians, and Nicaragua. Resolutions supporting the ongoing work of existing U.N. programs such as UNICEF, UNRWA, the U.N. disaster relief coordinator, UNITAR, UNEP, UNIDO, and UNCTAD were adopted, as were resolutions on the restitution of works of art to victims of expropriation and on migrant laborers. QUESTIONS RELATING TO INFORMATION The New World Information Order (NWIO) developed in the 1970's parallel to, but distinct from, the New International Economic Order (NIEO). One of the key issues in NWIO is the uneven distribution of information and communication resources throughout the world. The industrial, developed states have a monopoly on technology-radios, TV's, computers, and satellites as well as softwarejournalists, news services, and transmission facilities. Thus Third World countries complain that the output of news agencies based in developed states (AP, UPI, Reuters) has no special interest to them or their people because it is superficial, ethnocentric or biased in favor of the news of developed states, notwithstanding the recent efforts by a nonalined news pool to contribute to redressing this maldistribution. The U.N. and the specialized agencies, particularly UNESCO and the ITU, have over the years established international standards (the freedom of information is "a fundamental human right and the touch 27 A. Res. 34/197; A. Res. 34/198; A. Res. 34/210; A. Res. 34/217. 28 A. Res. 34/216. stone of all other freedoms," relevant provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Helsinki Accord); provided technical assistance to developing countries to develop or improve their informational capabilities; and provided publication and dissemination of public information to U.N. member governments. The General Assembly in 1978 appointed a 41-member ad hoc working group to review UN public information policies and activities. and in their 1979 report to the Special Political Committee (SPC) called for a review of the mandate of the UN's Public Information Department, an extension of the committee's mandate as well as an expansion of its size. A related issue concerned whether UNESCO or the UNGA would have primary responsibility in the UN system for dealing with questions of information. During the SPC debate on "Questions relating to Information," India introduced on November 9, on behalf of the G-77, a draft resolution which was subject to extensive consultations among the G-77, the Western Europeans and other groups and the Eastern Europeans. Subsequently, on December 4, SPC adopted by consensus an omnibus resolution submitted by India. This resolution authorized the continuation of the General Assembly Committee to Review UN Public Information Policies, henceforth to be called the UN Committee on Information and its expansion from 41 to 66 members (the additional 25 members to be appointed on the basis of geographical distribution); it also requested the new committee to promote a "more just and more effective world information and communication order," recognizing the central importance of and cooperation with UNESCO. The most important Western addition to the Indian resolution was an insertion in the preamble of references to the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights. The West succeeded in deleting from the final resolution language proposed by the Soviet Bloc supporting the sovereign right of a state to control information flow and the activities of journalists, as well as G-77 proposals on similar ideological references, no mean feat. SPC also endorsed an ASEAN sponsored resolution calling on the Director General of UNESCO to study the possibility of establishing an Information Fund for developing mass communication systems for social progress and development. In explaining its vote on the omnibus resolution,29 the United States said the "give and take" that marked the negotiations on the consensus resolution was a hopeful portent and that the provisions of the resolution made clear that a New World Information Order had to be based on the Freedom of Information. On the ASEAN resolution, the United States said it had joined the consensus, but that joining this consensus should not be construed as prejudicing the U.S. position on the establishment of an International Fund in UNESCO or on making contributions to it. SECURITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS Each year, the General Assembly, according to the U.N. Charter, must elect 5 of the 10 nonpermanent members of the Security Council to a 2-year term on the basis of regional geographic distribution. 29 A. Res. 34/182. Since the 2-year term of 5 nonpermanent members (Czechoslovakia, Gabon, Kuwait, Nigeria, and Bolivia) would expire December 31, 1979, the General Assembly began in mid-October to elect the five new members. Electing four of the five new members: The German Democratic Republic, Nigeria, the Philippines, and Tunisia proved no obstacle, but the election of the Latin American representative is surely to go down in history. The Latin American group nominated Cuba and Colombia for the Latin American seat on the Council. The contest between them was not easily resolved because neither could command the required twothirds (97 vote) majority, despite the fact that Cuba's Foreign Minister spent most of his time in New York at the Assembly session lobbying for the Cuban seat, and the United States, other Western States and various "conservative" Third World States quietly supported Colombia. As balloting continued, some hoped that Colombia and Cuba would compromise and split the 2-year term. Cuba, however, convinced it would ultimately win, refused to compromise. It took a major event in world politics-the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan-to break the deadlock. Following the inconclusive 153d and 154th ballots on Friday, January 4, on which Colombia won 72 votes and Cuba 71, and 69 and 75, respectively, the Cubans sensed the adverse impact of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Anticipating that this would erode its support among the nonalined countries for the Council seat, Cuba announced that it would withdraw its candidacy and support Mexico. Colombia, after consulting with its government and meeting with the Latin American group, agreed to withdraw and also support Mexico. On the 155th ballot, Mexico was elected the Latin member of the Council (133 (for Mexico)-3 (Cuba)-8 (abstention)). Having finally elected the fifth nonpermanent member of the Security Council, the General Assembly's 34th session concluded at 12:15 p.m., January 7, 1980. Mexico immediately joined the Security Council debate on Afghanistan, just in time to support the U.S.-initiated resolution condemning the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The 1980 Council membership consists of the five permanent members: The United States, United Kingdom, U.S.S.R., France, China; five nonpermanent member carryovers: Bangladesh, Jamaica, Norway, Portugal, and Zambia; and the five newly elected nonpermanent members: GDR, Philippines, Nigeria, Tunisia, and Mexico. SOCIAL AND HUMANITARIAN ISSUES The Third Committee on Social and Humanitarian Affairs dealt with a number of human rights issues as well as various social matters. Highlights of the Committee's work on human rights included the adoption of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, both of which the General Assembly subsequently adopted. The session also approved continued efforts by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights to complete drafting of the Convention on the Elimination of Religious Intolerance, the Convention on Torture, and the Code of Medical Ethics. In considering the implementation of the International Covenants, the Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Peoples, the Convention on Eliminating Racial Discrimination, the Convention To Suppress Apartheid, and the Declaration on Youth, the Committee recommended and the Assembly approved the following action: On the International Covenants on Political and Civil Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and on the Optional Protocol, the Assembly adopted Resolution 34/35 of the same title inviting non-State parties to acceed to the covenants and optional protocol; expressing appreciation of the work of the Human Rights Committee (under the Covenant on Political and Civil Rights) and welcoming ECOSOC's arrangements for considering reports submitted under provisions of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The United States has not yet ratified either covenant or the optional protocol and is thus ineligible to participate in the Human Rights Committee. However, the Soviet Union has ratified both instruments and sits on the Human Rights Committee. Continued nonratification by the United States, however, hinders our efforts to promote U.S. human rights initiatives in the Third Committee, the Assembly, as well as the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. The United States has also not yet ratified the 1965 Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, though it has been submitted to the Senate, nor do we participate in the U.N. Decade to Combat the Elimination of Racial Discrimination because of UNGA Resolution 3379 (1975) which declared Zionism a form of Racism. Nonetheless, the General Assembly adopted two resolutions reiterating support for the Program to Combat Racism and approving the current status of accessions to the Conventions on Eliminating Race Discrimination and the Suppression and Punishment of Apartheid.30 DECOLONIZATION On the Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Peoples, the Assembly adopted Resolution 34/44 by recorded vote, 105-20-16.31 Third World and Soviets supported this, but the West opposed. This resolution covered the waterfront. It condemned Israel for expansionism in the Middle East, for denying self-determination and independence to the Palestinians, the unilateral violations of sanctions against Southern Rhodesia, and the policies of NATO members whose relations with "the racist regimes in Southern Africa" encourage those regimes to continue to persist in suppressing peoples. Besides these activities, the Third Committee debate focused on particular social groups: Women, refugees, migrant workers, youth, the elderly, and the disabled, and on institutional arrangements for human rights. The Assembly approved with U.S. support the on-going preparations for the World Conference on the U.N. Decade for Women to be held in 1980 in Copenhagen, Denmark, for the International Year of Disabled Persons in 1981; for the World Assembly on the Elderly in 1982; and for International Youth Year in 1985. It also endorsed the continuing work of the office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and its efforts to organize a program of assistance to South 30 A. Res. 34/24. 81 A. Res. 34/44. 60-616 O- 80 - 3 |