A/31/PV.38 General Assembly

The Organization of African Unity [ OA U], of which Mauritius is the Chairman this year, decided at its last summit conference, held in Port Louis,l to bring the French-Comorian dispute concerning the Comorian island of Mayotte to the attention of this session of the General Assembly in the hope that the United Nations would help to resolve that controversy once and for all. The thesis of OAU was based mainly upon a principle which it considers sacred-namely, that of the territorial integrity of its member States, the very principle that is enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. 2. For OAU, the State of Comoros, which the United Nations decided to admit as one of its Members on 12 November 1975, is indeed made up of four islands including Mayotte. We venture to hope that by that decision the United Nations has laid down the geographic limits of the new State. 3. Our purpose is to preserve that geographic unit. For that purpose we solemnly appeal to France to respect the political unity of the Comoros. That political unity was made clear in the referendum of 22 December 1974 which the French authorities themselves organized and which made it possible for the Comorian people to express by an overwhelming majority its wish to accede to independence. The fact that a tiny minority of the people of Mayotte voted otherwise does not give France the right to continue to occupy Mayotte and to organize consultations there which can only encourage that minority to refuse to accept the law of the majority and serve to legalize the French presence in Mayotte. The representative of the Comoros has spoken to us [ 33rd meeting] of the presence of the French administration and army in Mayotte as well as of certain 1 Thirteenth ordinary session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity, held at Port Louis, Maurltlua, from 2 to 6 July 1976. NEW YORK measures taken by France which are designed to alter the natural economic and cultural ties between the inhabitants of ~he Comoro archipelago. We urge France to put an end to 1ts presence and to those measures which can only perpetuate the division of the people of the Comoros. 4. The representative of the Comoros also reaffirmed at the beginning of this debate the desire of his Government t~ se:~ a ju~t and equitable solution on any basis of ?tscus~wn whtch would safeguard political unity, territorial mtegnty and respect for sovereignty and all other interests. We share his feelings and sincerely hope that France will as soon. as possible t~k~ steps to make such a dialogue posstble. The condtttons of that dialogue · are clearly enumerated in draft resolution A/31 /L.3 and Corr.l, which was submitted yesterday by the Cameroons on behalf of all the sponsors, including my own country. 5. On the other hand, we have been happy to hear the representative of France state [34th meeting] that his country believes in the virtues of dialogue. We hope that France will create the necessary conditions for a dialogue with the State of the Comoros in order to settle once and for all its dispute with that country. That dialogue, in our opinion, should not lead us to accept a special status for Mayotte but, on the contrary, should remove the barriers which still prevent that Comorian island from rejoining the other islands. Mayotte is an integral part of the State of Comoros. The situation as a result of which it is now separated has lasted all too long. We sincerely hope that the action of this Assembly will help to put an end to that abnormal situation.

The General Assembly is now consider- ing a very important question, that of the island of Mayotte, which is part of the Comoros. My country, convinced of the key role which the United Nations played with respect to the changes that have recently come about in the process of decolonization and of the success of its activities in that process, believes that new methods are being sought in order to maintain colonialism and the exploitation of peoples. 7. In this connexion I should like to say that the method followed by France with regard to the question of the Comoro islands is proof of this state of affairs. In spite of the expressed will of the population to achieve indepen- dence, territorial integrity and unity of the archipelago, France has proceeded to divide these islands. 8. The French Government thereby acted in contravention of its own decisions, namely, those taken on 9 September 1889, 9 May 1946, 17 April 1952, 22 July 1957, 22 December 1961 and 3 January 1968, which confirmed the "The Comoros are a single unit, they have always been a single unit, and it is natural that their fate should be a common fate ... ".2 9. I believe that these words are quite clear on this matter and, in view of the commitment undertaken by the President of the French Republic, my delegation does not deem it necessary to add anything. 10. \Ve therefore do not understand the present attitude of France, which ignores and flouts the principal of self-determination, that fundamental principle enshrined in the United Nations Charter, especially in view of the declaration signed on 15 June 1973 on the granting of independence .. to the Comoro islands after 130 years of colonization:f"' 11. In its resolution 3385 (XXX) dated 12 November 1975 the United Nations reaffirmed "the necessity of respecting the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro Archipelago composed of the islands of Anjouan, Grande- Comore, Mayotte and Moheli", and this resolution was adopted by consensus, France not having objected at all. Consequently, the international community must now assume its responsibilities with regard to the implementa· tion and application of this resolution, in order to preserve the unity of the Comoro islands. France organized a referendum and thereby violated the United Nations resolution because that referendum had no legal basis. How could a new referendum be held when the population had already demonstrated its will to preserve its unity and its integrity irt the referendum held on 22 December 1974? 12. The OAU Council of Ministers, meeting in Mauritius, in its resolution 497 (XXVII) decided to consider the Comoro islands as one State member of OAU. The referendum of 22 December 1974, in which the population reaffirmed its will to accede to independence and territorial integrity by an overwhelming majority, is proof that it is indeed one single State. 13. I should like to mention also the resolution adopted recently by the Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, held in Colombo, Sri Lanka. By that resolution the Conference reaffirmed the need for France to respect the sovereignty and territorial unity of the Comoros and to withdraw its forces from the Comorian island of Mayotte {see A/31/197, annex IV, resolution 7/. 14. France, disregarding the authority of the United Nations, has made use of its veto with respect to this question. That proves that the draft resolution did not serve French interests. That was a violation of a resolution adopted by the United Nations and action which prevented the Security Council from fulfilling its role in this matter. "At the moment we do not feel assured of world peace and security. There is an explosive problem in Africa and specifically in the Comoro islands, where France obsti· nately insists on its continued presence in the island of Mayotte. We do not believe that France can bind its own territory in Europe to part of an African territory. Despite our friendship with France, we cannot forget that the independence of the peoples is at stake here and the Ubyan Arab Republic will sacrifice its own interests for the sake of the interests, independence and security of the peoples of the third world and the non-aligned countries. We will not barter our principles for anything whatsoever. "This conference must raise its voice in support of the independence and unity of the Comoro islands and demand that all foreign forces be withdrawn from the Comoro islands." 16. Undoubtedly, the authorities of the Comoro islands are trying to negotiate with France for a fast solution to solve the problem of the Comorian island of Mayotte. My country's delegation supports these attempts and the people of the Libyan Arab Republic stand by the popula· tion of the Republic of the Comoros in its struggle for total independence and national unity.

The Ethiopian delegation has asked to speak in order to join in lending unqualified support for the people and Government of a young African sister State the Republic of the Comoros. The item on the agenda, the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte, is of particular interest to my Government, as it is to the whole of Africa. It is of interest because an African State has been dismembered by its former administering Power, in the face of the Comorian people's strong resistance as well as the opposition of Africa as a whole. 18. The representative of France, in his statement last Monday, pleaded for understanding and said that a "lan· guage of accusation will in no way assist the enterprise of reason that is needed" [34th meeting, para. 8]. While the Ethiopian delegation would like to assure the delegation of France that it will not resort to accusations, I should nevertheless like to point out some of the questionable methods the French Government has used in the decoloni- zation of the Comoros. 19. A number of African representatives, in particular the representatives of the Comoros, Mali and Madagascar, have already acquainted us with the sequence of events which has led to the violation of the political unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros, which France had previously pledged to respect through pronouncements by the highest officials of the French Republic. 20. To underscore the salient contradictions of French policy with respect to the decolonization of the Comoros, it is necessary to refer once more to the pronouncements of the highest French authorities and to correlate these with subsequent actions to which France resorted. "(The Comoros] are an archipelago which constitutes a single entity ... " ... The Comoros are a single unit, they have always been a single unit, and it is natural that their fate should be a common fate ... ". 22. Similarly, the remarks made on 26 August 1974 by Mr. Olivier Stim, the French Secretary of State for Overseas Departments and Territories, made it abundantly clear that France had no intention of dismembering the Comoros. 23. Yet actions taken by France subsequent to the referendum of 22 December 1974 appear to us to be grossly at variance with the pronouncements to which I have just referred. A majority of over 94 per cent of all the people of the Comorian islands voted for independence; surely that should have been the end of the French decolonization mission. Any subsequent consultation with a section of the population that has always constituted an integral part of the Comoros was as unnecessary as it was unjust and illegal. It is in that respect that my delegation considers the actions of France unwarranted. 24. The joint Franco-Comorian Declaration of IS June 1973 had also made it clear that the territorial integrity of the Comoros was to be preserved. France had thus made it clear-or so it seemed at the time-that it recognized the political unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros. 25. The representative of France, in his statement of 18 October 1976 to this Assembly, argued that these various declarations and statements showed France's good inten- tions. It may indeed have showed goood intentions; my delegation would like to believe it did. But the question that inevitably arises is, Has France lived up to these good intentions? As I have endeavoured to indicate, I am afraid it has not. 26. In the case of Mayotte, France has acted contrary to its long-standing practice. It has so far failed to respond positively to the demand of the Comorian peo~le fo: !he restoration of and scrupulous respect for their political unity and territorial integrity. 27. My delegation finds also that the argument th~t "the inhabitants of Mayotte are not on good terms w1th the inhabitants of the other islands" [Ibid.} is hardly a legitimate ground for dismembering a State. ~lot of people in a lot of countries are not on good terms w1th sections of the population in their respective countries, but .that has never been invoked as a legitimate ground for denymg them their national unity and their territorial integrity· 28. The representative of France, in the statement to which I have already referred, indicated that the French Parliament would soon examine the problem of Mayotte. He indicated further that a solution would be _wor~e? out. My delegation is happy to hear that France IS _willmg to review what one hopes it now understands as havmg been a great mistake. I should like, though, to inject a word of 29. In the circumstances, and also pursuant to decisions of the United Nations, OAU and the non-aligned countries, France will have honourably discharged its decolonization responsibilities only when it undertakes speedy action towards restoring the political unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros. My delegation therefore hopes that France will heed the numerous appeals addressed to it in this respect and close the fmal chapters of French colonialism with the realistic firmness it has often shown in the past.

The impor- tance of the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte cannot be overemphasized. The Liberian delegation regards this as being one of the last sequels of colonization by the French Government in the Indian Ocean-an area which the majority of mankind continues to declare should be accepted and respected as a zone of peace and free of nuclear and/or other military installations. We regard France's continued presence on the island of Mayotte as being a flagrant violation of one of the cardinal principles upon which the United Nations is based-a principle which is enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in resolution 1514 (XV) of December 1960-the right of a people to self-determination and ind.epen~ence. Equally, the Liberian Government strongly beheves m the territorial integrity and sovereignty of States. 31. The facts and figures regarding the problem of the Comoros are too well known for me to labour the issue here. Suffice it merely to recall briefly the following. 32. First, in the French-administered referendum of .22 December 1974 the Comorian people, by an overwhelmmg figure of 95 per cent, voted in favour of independence and an end to France's presence in the archipelago. To the best of our knowledge, France never proclaimed that ~e result of the referendum should be considered on an Island-by- island basis, nor had it the right to do so. 33 Secondly in General Assembly resolution 33B5 (XXX) ~f 12 November 1975, the admission of the Comoros to membership in this world body was stated thus: "Reaffinning the necessity of respecting ~he unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro Archipelago, com- posed of the islands of Anjoua~, Gr~nde-Com~re, Mayotte and Moheli, as emphasized m resolu~wn 3291 (XXIX) of 13 December 1974 and other resolutiOns of the General Assembly, "Decides to admit the Comoros to membership in the United Nations." In taking this extraordinary precaution the G~ner~ Assem· bly in this resolution emphasized a de facto Situation: that 34. France, a founding Member of this Organization, whose Charter it has adopted and ratified, and probably more important, a permanent member of the Security Council, is compelled to abide by the provisions of Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations which makes binding all decisions and resolutions of the Security council. We cannot accept its abstention in the vote as an excuse to adopt a negative attitude to the resolutions of the Security Council and/or the General Assembly. 35. This body has a duty to uphold the unity and territorial integrity of one of its Member States, the Republic of the Comoros. The importance which the Liberian Government attaches to this question is clearly in consonance with the resolution of the Council of Ministers of OAU dated 3July 1976, which, among other things, considers that the establishment of military bases in the Indian Ocean by France and all the other imperialist Western Powers constitutes a flagrant aggression against the independent States of Africa and Asia; condemns the so-called referendums of 8 February 1976 and 11 April 1976, which it considers null and void; strongly condemns France's presence in Mayotte, which constitutes aggression against the national unity, territorial integrity and sover- eignty of the independent Republic of the Comoros and is prejudicial to the independence and security of the whole of Africa; and demands that the French Government withdraw immediately from the Comorian island of Mayotte, which is an integral part of the independent Republic of the Comoros, and that it respect the sover- eignty of the new State [see A/31/196 and Co".1, annex, resolurion497(XXVII}/. 36. That is the position of OAU, to which my Govern- ment fully subscribes. The Government of the Republic of France is bound to adhere to that resolution as well as to 44. That resolution confirms the principles of the United the resolution of the Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Nations Charter, particularly the principle of the self- Government of Non-Aligned Countries, which recently determinatic:-. of peoples. Sudan has always followed with convened in Colombo, Sri Lanka {see A/31/197, annex IV, great attention and admiration the just struggle of colo- resolulion 7}. The Liberian delegation will therefore nized countries and peoples in their attempt to win support draft resolution A/31/L.3 and Corr.I on the independence. We have admired the struggle of the Coma- question of the Comorian island of Mayotte, which I rian people, as well as the measures adopted by France in believe at this stage is sponsored by 41 States. the process of decolonization to grant to the peoples it had 37. We believe that, in an effort to prevent a serious _. colonized their right to self-determination. confrontation with Africa and the non-aligned nations, the _ 45_ It seems that France did not want to leave the Comoro Government of France should immediately decide to islands without exercising an influence on the fate of that restore the island of Mayotte to the Republic of the Comoros. Any act other than that would be completely region. unacceptable to us. France cannot continue publicly to ignore the aspirations of the majority of the Comorians by satisfying its own selfish interests and those of a small minority of Comorians. 38. Finally, it would appear useful to quote Mr. Valery Giscard d'Estaing, who, on 24 October 1974 during a press conference, stated the following in unambiguous terms: "[The Comoros] are an archipelago which constitutes a single entity ... 39. We ask, and in the circumstances must demand, that the Government of France adhere to the views that have been expressed by its President and implement them. We will settle for nothing less than an immediate and total withdrawal of the French presence from the Comorian island of Mayotte. Justice and right must prevail despite our relative political, economic and military powers.

My delegation attaches very great importance to the item we are now considering, namely the question of the island of Mayotte, which is part of the Comorian islands. 41. The Security Council has already discussed this question, in February last, but despite the virtual unanimity of the members of the Council, the abuse of the right of veto made it impossible to adopt a decision on the matter. I hope that this time we shall be able to take advantage of the opportunity given us to reach a solution to the problem. 42. On 13 October [29th meeting/ the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Sud.m stated our position on this problem. I should like to take this opportunity to conftrm that position. 43. Sudan considers the island of Mayotte to be an integral part of the Comorian islands. In taking that position we introduce no new element. We merely base ourselves upon the situation established in 1975 when this Assembly adopted its resolution 3385 (XXX), on the basis of the recommendation of the Security Council, and accepted the State of the Comoros as a full Member of our Organization, reaffirming its sovereignty, unity and terri- torial integrity. 46. However, we are surprised by the position it had adopted, because we did not expect to see France granting only a partial independence to the Comoros, and we believe that, faithful to its moral standards and principles, it really wished to grant total independence to the islands. 47. Unfortunately, we have been disappointed, because France, instead of helping the Comoros to achieve indepen- dence, unity, and political and economic progress, is now sowing discord and division among the people of one 48. France has an internal problem and France may solve its own problems as it wishes, so long as it does not do so to the detriment of the interests of the Comoros. The President of France has declared that the Comoros are indivisible. However, other voices, unfortunately, have been raised in France itself against the unity of the Comoros. We hope indeed that the Comoros will soon achieve total independence by recovering the island of Mayotte; and here I should like to recall the words of President Giscard d'Estaing when he stated that "the population [of the Comoros] is homogeneous ... [and it is not possible] to propose to shatter the unity of what has always been the single Comoro archipelago." 49. That part of the world is a hot-bed of tension, and that tension has been aggravated recently. Free Africa wishes to safeguard its freedom and, as we are well aware, Africa had experienced a number of very difficult and serious problems before the process of decolonization was launched.~ It is time that Africa put an end to these problems. Africa should be left to live in peace, because Africa has indeed the right to security and peace. SO. We supported, and have become a sponsor of, draft resolution A/31/L3 and Corr.l. I wish to appeal to all delegations present here to vote for this draft resolution because it is one that fulfils the requirements of the situation and because it is based on earlier resolutions adopted at the Mauritius Conference and at the Fifth Conference of non-aligned countries in Colombo last August. 5 I. We also wish to address an appeal to France to withdraw immediately from the Comoro islands, and especially from Mayotte.

Sierra Leone does not stand here this afternoon to debate any issues in relation to Mayotte. We cannot debate them because we believe that the facts are clear. In our view, these facts are not debatable. Mayotte is an island in the Comoro archipelago which became an independent sovereign State after 130 years of French colonial rule. France occupies that Como- rian island. Rather, Sierra Leone will join those who have appealed to France from this rostrum and have tried to reason with France to abandon its colonial tendencies in the island of Mayotte, a part of the sovereign State of Comoros, a Member of this world body. 53. During the twenty-ninth session, the General Assem- bly adopted resolution 3291 (XXIX) on the question of the Comoro Archipelago, the seventh preambular paragraph of which reads as follows: "Bearing in mind the statement by the representative of France that the French Government has affirmed 'the readiness of the Comoro Archipelago for independence' You will note that the readiness for independence, which was recognized by France, was not that of Anjouan, M obeli, Grande-Comore, nor yet of Mayotte separately, but of the entire Comoro archipelago. France contributed to the adoption of that resolution which, in its paragraphs 3 and 5 reads as follows: "Reaffirms the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro Archipelago, "Requests the Government of France, as the admin- istering Power, to ensure that the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro Archipelago are preserved". 54. My delegation is therefore surprised that France, which participated in this Organization's resolve to preserve the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros, on the eve of independence, should have capitalized on a handful of negative votes in any of its islands in the ensuing referendum to satisfy its own desires. 55. The Comoro archipelago is suffering today, we think, mainly because of its geographical nature-that is, it is a territory made up of several small islands. If a section of any of France's ex-colonies had opposed independence, would it have encouraged the secession of any of those provinces, under the pretext that the particular section or province wanted to stay with France? We do not think so, unless, of course, there had been an ulterior motive, as seems quite evident in this particular case: the use of the island of Mayotte to retain France's military presence in the Indian Ocean. 56. We would like to believe and to tell France that with mutual consent such arrangements could yet be concluded amicably with the people of Mayotte with whom France has had ties for a very long time. There are many examples of the existence of military bases which have been retained on foreign soil for one reason or another under the circumstances I have mentioned. 57. Independence is a right and not a privilege. Thus, my delegation does not believe in the whole process of subjecting colonized peoples to opting for independence on the basis of a referendum. But it is the French method. However, my delegation would like to be advised on whether that method includes imposing a referendum on a part of a sovereign, independent State such as we know the Comoros to be, when the overwhelming majority of votes have been cast in favour of independence, as in the referendum of 22 December 1974 conducted by France. In the Security Council debate on the situation in the Comoros in February this year, the representative of France rightly pointed out that the results of that referendum: "gave a very strong majority of voters in favour of independence".3 What else, therefore, does France want 58. In that same statement in the Security Council, the representative of France said that: "France certainly has no interest in keeping Mayotte within its constitutional frame- work".3 My delegation fails, therefore, to comprehend the reasons behind the manipulation of referendum results by tiny fractions and percentages of the population of the territory of the Comoros to the advantage of France. 59. The fact that France continues to colonize Mayotte will not alter the other fact of its geographical position, which is that it is an island and will remain an integral part of the independent and sovereign State of the Comoro archipelago. The dismemberment of any Territory, and especially of a State Member of the United Nations, is an act which the United Nations, founded on the principle of the inviolability of respect for territorial integrity, has condemned and will always condemn. It is a matter for regret that any of the permanent members of the Security Council, and any signatory of the Charter, should give cause for this Assembly to debate one of the principles of the Charter with the purpose of convincing any such member. This expensive exercise is a luxury which the United Nations can ill afford in these days of financial difficulties. It is our hope that the Government of France will take immediate steps to remedy a situation which it should not have allowed to arise if, as a colonial Power, it had genuinely fulfilled its obligations as set out in Article 73 e of the Charter. 60. Three years ago almost to the day this Assembly had a lengthy debate on the question of the illegal occupation of parts of the independent State of Guinea-Bissau by Portu- guese troops. The resolution condemning such an act {resolution 3061 ( XXVIII)j was overwhelmingly adopted by this Assembly. lt is our expectation, therefore, that similar steps will be taken to resolve this situation which, in our estimation, is similar to what existed then in Guinea- Bissau. It is with this in mind, coupled with our respect for the principles of the Charter, that we have joined in sponsoring draft resolution A/3l/L.3 and Corr.l aimed at bringing peace and stability to the Comoro archipelago, thereby averting what is otherwise likely to develop into an explosive situation which will shatter not only the peace and security of the Indian Ocean but that of the continent of Africa as a whole. 61. In conclusion, I find nothing more appropriate to say to France than the very words of the President of the French Republic at a news conference, nearly two years ago to the day, when he said: "[The Comoros] are an archipelago which constitutes a single entity, situated, as you know, between independent Madagascar and Mozambique. . . . The population is homogeneous, with practically no people of French origin, ?r only very few. In the face of the demand for "I believe that one must accept contemporary realities. The Comoros are a single unit, they have always been a single unit, and it is natural that their fate should be a common fate, even if some of them-and naturally this affects us, although we must not draw conclusions from it-may have wanted a different solution. "On the occasion of the attainment of independence by a Territory, it is not for us to propose to shatter the unity of what has always been the single Comoro archipelago." Indeed, these are the words of a statesman, properly inspired and motivated. We can only urge that the all-powerful French Parliament be thus inspired and moti- vated to save that great country any further embarrassment on the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte.

The delegation of the Ivory Coast is taking part in this debate devoted to the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte, which could just as well have beeh called a Franco-Comorian dispute, and by extension a Franco- African dispute, in order to manifest, together with all Africa,its total solidarity with the Republic of the Como!os in that country's just demand for respect for its national sovereignty, its unity and its territorial integrity. 63. During our previous statements on the question of the Comoro archipelago, before this young African State had assumed its place in the comity of nations, we were among those who at no time doubted the intention of France to respond loyally to the legitimate aspirations of the Como- rian people to independence, as they were clearly displayed at the elections of 3 December 1972 and during the deliberations of the Comoros Chamber on 22 December of the same year. 64. We attempted to pursuade other colleagues to share our conviction, especially since the apprehensions which some of them might, rightly or wrongly, have had as a result of certain ambiguities resulting from the Joint Declaration of 15 June 1973 appeared to us to be allayed by the assurance given at the time by the French Government in its important declaration of 26 August 1974. According to the terms of that declaration, the consultation that France intended to hold on the indepen- dence of the Territory was to be organized on a global basis, with the Territory retaining on its accession to independence the frontiers it had as a colony. France did not visualize at that time a different status for the various islands of the archipelago, which it had always considered and administered as a single political, administrative and legal entity. 65. That declaration, which dispelled any equivocation concerning Frm.ce's intention with respect to the Comoros, was to be confirmed by the President of the French Republic who, in his press conference of 24 October 1974, rejected any idea of dismemberment of the Comoro 66. The Comorian people, following the referendum of 22 December 1974, has made its choice, a clear and unambigu- ous choice: independence in a spirit of friendship and co-operation with France. France, therefore, should merely have taken note of the matter. 67. Since the representative of France has invited us to show frankness in this debate, we are bound to tell him with our characteristic frankness and sincerity that we do not at all share the position that his Government is adopting in this matter, even if we can understand that this position has been dictated to it by circumstances which derive from French institutions for which we have the greatest respect. 68. We regret that the French Government has not done everything in its power to prevent the basis on which the results of the consultation of 22 December 1974 were considered being changed, which would have spared us this unfortunate debate. We regret even more that certain French parliamentarians and politicians did not sufficiently weigh the consequences of their acts-consequences which are damaging to France's prestige-when they assumed the heavy responsibility of favouring the separatism of Mayotte by deciding that the results of the referendum of 22 December 1974 were to be examined island by island and no longer on a global basis, as the French Government had agreed to do, that being the only basis which would permit the political unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros to be preserved. 69. No more yesterday than today had we the intention of doubting the good faith of the French Government. But this can in no way mean that we accept the arguments put forward by France to justify its present position or that we are ready to endorse that position. 70. We have difficulty in believing that France, which has always defended the principles of the territorial integrity of States and the self-determination of peoples, can today base arguments on ethnic peculiarities or other characteristics in order to abandon a policy of which it could well be proud, since all the Territories of what was formerly the French colonial empire have acceded to independence within their colonial territorial limits; thus it respected their political unity and territorial integrity, even if they did not at the outset exactly correspond to geopolitical, historical, ethno- logical or other realities. 71. These characteristics are in no sense new to France; they are inherent in the nature of the majority of its Territories. They are characteristics which these Territories have had to transcend in order to build progressively, through a policy of dialogue and co-operation, hannonious, united and fraternal nations. It is therefore dangerous to stir up those characteristics which do not foster rapproche- ment or reconciliation but rather complicate th(! solution of the problem. We have no doubt that if the Comorians and the people of Mayotte had the possibility of freely 72. It is therefore difficult for us to admit a different process for the Republic of the Comoros and to endorse a policy that would in the long run be tantamount to dismemberment of the State. We therefore reaffirm that the island of Mayotte is an integral part of the Republic of the Comoros, which is a sovereign and independent State and a Member of our Organization. It therefore follows that any action undertaken by France that would adversely affect the national sovereignty, political unity and territorial integrity of that young State could only meet with our opposition. We are not among those who challenge the merits of the referendum to determine the will of the people. In regard particularly to the States of the former Franco-African community, we continue to believe that since general consultations of the kind that took place in the Comoro archipelago in 1972 have clearly shown the will of the people of the Territory to accede to independence and the deliberations of the legislative body have confirmed that will, there is no longer any need to hold a new referendum that would cast doubt upon the wishes of that people, arouse mistrust in the minds of people and upset the relat:ons between the former administering Power and the new State. We therefore consider that France could have taken note of that desire or decision and could have negotiated with the representatives of the country so as to transfer to them the attributes of sovereignty that it still retains. 73. France's decolonization policy is too rich in lessons for it to be necessary to dwell at length on this argument. 74. If the members of the French Parliament had drawn inspiration from that they would certainly have avoided involving their country in this Mayotte affair. At a time when France has announced its intention of leading to independence the French Territory of the Afars and Issas, or the French Coast of Somalia (Djibouti), at a time when the last bastion of colonialism in southern Africa is showing wide cracks and the hour of the total decolonization of Africa is approaching, one can quite justly wonder what France has to gain from clinging to that little island of Mayotte when it has led to independence several scores of States whose very presence here is the most striking evidence of its decolonization policy, an undertaking of which it can justly be proud and which remains its best claims to glory. 75. Would it not have been better to promote conciliation between the people of Mayotte and of the Comoros by making the former understand that their future lies in an entente with their Comorian brethren, instead of trying to pursue a policy which the whole of Africa condemns as adversely affecting the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of the Republic of the Comoros? That policy could have dire consequences for Africa because it could easily be imitated by other Powers, particularly in southern Africa. If necessary, could France not appeal to the good offices of the African Heads of State for help in this delicate task and thus facilitate contacts between the 76. Accordingly, we urge France to refrain from any action that would consolidate the dismemberment of the Comoros and put further obstacles in the way of the rapid settlement of its dispute with the Republic of the Comoros and a reconciliation between Comorians and Mayottans. We urge it to take al1 the necessary measures to give reassurance to the Comorian State. The first of such measures, in our view, would be to defer or abandon its plan of giving the island of Mayotte some special status, even if that status were to be flexible and were to leave future prospects open; and then to enter into negotiations with the Comorian Government to fmd a solution to the dispute, a solution that would safeguard the unity and territorial integrity of the Republic of the Comoros. 77. We ask it to do everything in its power to re-establish in harmony and concord the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros by helping Mayotte and its people to re-enter the Comorian entity. It is in that sense that once again we take cognizance of the statement of France that it would leave the future prospects open [9th meeting, para. 116]. We venture to hope that France will act in that way.

The Guinean revolution has always proclaimed its total readiness to defend the overriding interests of Africa. 79. My country, the Republic of Guinea, has always been firmly attached to the sacred principle of the right of all peoples to self-determination and independence, a principal set forth in the United Nations Charter and enshrined in the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in resolution 1514 (XV). 80. It is therefore normal that Guinea should make an appeal to the international community to assess all aspects of the problems of Africa in order to be able to defend with the necessary vigour the principles that are set forth in the Charter. 81. Indeed, it is unacceptable that Africa should today be the only continent where vestiges of direct colonial domination may be found. And it must be said that the question of Mayotte is nothing but a purely colonial problem. The occupation of that Comorian island is part and parcel of the activities pursued by the imperiali~t Powers in the Indian Ocean to defend at all costs thetr investments in southern Africa. 82. It was on 6 July 1975 that the heroic people of the Comoros, fully aware of their historic responsibilities and their inalienable rights, proclaimed their independence through the will of an overwhelming majority of the Comorian people freely expressed in the course of a referendum which was held on 22 December 1974. 83. We remember that the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros have always been recognized by all French laws during the 130 years of colonization. And, as was affirmed by the representative of the Comoros on Monday, of 9 September 1889 on annexation to the law of 23 November 1974 on independence" [ 33rd meeting, para. 55]. 84. We believe that France must assume all its obligations pursuant to those various laws which recognize the unity and territorial integrity of the Republic of the Comoros. 85. In this connexion, the President of the French Republic stated on 24 October 1974, at a press conference, the following: "The population [of the Comoros] is homogeneous, with practically no people of French origin, or only very few .... was it reasonable to imagine that a part of the archipelago should become independent and that one island, whatever sympathy one might have for its inhabit· ants, should retain a different status? "I believe that one must accept contemporary realities. The Comoros are a single unit, they have always been a single unit, and it is natural that their fate should be a common fate, even if some of them ... may have wanted a different solution. "On the occasion of the attainment of independence by a Territory, it is not for us to propose to shatter the unity of what has always been the single Comoro archipelago." 86. Thus it is surprising that France does not find it possible to accept the logical and legal consequences of an act of full sovereignty. 87. The delegation of the Party State of Guinea was surprised to hear the statement made by the representative of France on Tuesday, 12 October 1976, when exercising his right of reply. He said: "The island of Mayotte is an integral part of the French Republic because of the ... expressed will of its people." [28th meeting, para. J6Z] From that statement it is very clear that it is not so much respect for the wish of the Comorian people itself, and even less for the most authoritative voice of the French Government, which also has a majority in the French Parliament, as respect for the so-called "will" of the people of Mayotte that France is concerned with. 88. The Algeria of yesterday could not be an integra~ part of France, and even less can Mayotte. As Guinea·Btssau, Angola and Mozambique could not be integral parts of Portugal, neither can Mayotte be an integral part of France. 89. Just as the people of Brittany are French and hence European, the people of Mayotte are Comorian, and hence African. 90. France must once and for all, in order to regain and confirm its prestige in its relations with Africa, lear~ f~om the stinging defeat of the evil forces of colomahsm, neo-colonialism and imperialism. 92. Finally, our delegation will support any meaningful and necessary steps to restore the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of the Comoros in all its component parts like any other Member of our Organ· ization. 93. We cannot force any secession; we cannot eternally stand in the way of the will of the people Those lessons must be understood once and for all.

As this is the first time I have had the honour of addressing this Assembly since the accession of Mr. Amerasinghe to the presidency of the current session of the General Assembly, I should be remiss if I did not express my delegation's satisfaction at seeing him guiding the work of this thirty-first session. We believe that his election is not a mere coincidence but rather the result of his well-known experience and skill in the solution of in temational problems and, no less important, of the policy favourable to the third world and the non-alignment movement followed by the Government which he repre- sents in this international Organization. We are convinced that the work of this session will be carried out in a spirit of harmony and crowned with success. 95. The delegation of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea is taking part in the debate on the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte, which has been included in the agenda of this thirty-first session of the General Assembly, in order once again to express the unswerving position of the Government of Equatorial Guinea to co-operate and col· la borate, in so far as this is possible, in the task of the total and complete .eradication of colonialism, neo-colonialism and imperialism in all their forms and manifestations and wherever they occur, for we believe that, as long as these diabolical systems and their manifestations persist, inter- national peace and security will be constantly threatened. 96. The delegation of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea asked to speak on the question of Mayotte because, regrettably, we have observed that the repugnant imperialist practice of "divide and rule", of which the ~e~blic of the Comoros is now the victim, is still being applied m the plans of the imperialists to which the Republic of Equ~torial Guinea is referring. These intentions have been manifested constantly in the actions of certain super-impe~ialist coun· tries which, in the solution of problems, put their trust only in political and economic pressures and deliberately set aside diplomatic principlP.s and international law. 97. I should like to mention by way of example and before dealing with the crux of the matter now before us a recent incident which took place in Madrid, when the Embassy of the United States in that capital ~efused to grant entry visas to the members of the d~legati~n of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea to attend this sess10n of the Assembly on the pretext-as arbitrary as it is absurd-of the the Republic of Equatorial Guinea when, on 29 September last, he declared that for its part Equatorial Guinea was maintaining diplomatic and other relations with the United States of America but noted with great surprise and pain that the Government in Washington had unilaterally sus· pended the said relations for the simple reason that his Government, exercising its sovereign rights, had declared the American Ambassador in Malabo persona non grata. I wonder whether under the rules of diplomacy the declara· tion <>f an ambassador persona non grata is sufficient grounds for the breaking or suspension of diplomatic relations. If this is the case, must a country not maintaining diplomatic relations with the United States be deprived of its right as a Member to participate in the work of the General Assembly of our Organization? This and other examples we could cite are eloquent testimony to the imperialist manoeuvres of the super-Powers to flout our inalienable rights to sovereignty, unity, territorial integrity and independence. 98. The case of the Comoros is yet another example of flagrant violation of the principles of the Charter of this Organization and is a clear and obstinate challenge to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a State de jure and de facto a Member of our Organization. 99. One of the main organs of our Organization is now examining the developments in the situation prevailing in the Republic of the Comoros, a situation deliberately created by France's continued illegal occupation of the island of Mayotte, which is an integral and inseparable part of a country whose independence and sovereignty have been internationally recognized. The Comoro archipelago, which is situated north of the Mozambique Channel, comprises four islands: Grande-Comore, Anjouan: ~obeli and Mayotte. This juridical entity has been traditiOnally recognized not only since 1914 by the administering Power but also by the international community and international law at all levels. 100. Just as the Comoro archipelago could not avoid the clutches of the great French colonial empire, so the Comoro archipelago, in response to the popular will and despite the manoeuvres of the colonial Power, ~nnot remain outside the context of the historic DeclaratiOn on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. 101. Indeed, in recognition of the political reality which justified this act, the valiant people .of the Comoros declared the independence of the archipelago on 6 July 1975. That was a unilateral declaration, and the Head ~f State of the Republic of Comoros declared before this Assembly on 12 November 1975, immediately after the admission of his country to our Organization, that: "The unilateral declaration of independence of 6 July 1975 was not an act of defiance of France, but rather the expression of our will and determination in the face of 102. In order to implement the will of the Comorian people democratically expressed on 22 December 1974 and its consequences of 6 July 1975, the OAU Council of Ministers for Foreign Affairs, meeting in the city of Kampala from 18 to 25 July 1975, decided unanimously and by acclamation to admit the Republic of the Comoros as a State member of that Organization and at the same time appealed to the French Government to respect the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the said Republic. 103. On 20 August 1975 the Special Committee on the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, while considering the question of Comoros, took note with satisfaction of the fact that the Comoros had declared their independence on 6 July 1975 and called upon "the French Government to respect the independence, unity and terri- torial integrity of Comoro" .s 104. On 30 August 1975 the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the non-aligned countries adopted in the city of Lima an important declaration which stated inter alia: "TI1e Ministers for Foreign Affairs wam1ly congratulate the people of the Comoro Islands on the progress of their struggle for national liberation. They applaud the procla- mation of independence of the people of the Comoro and call upon the French Government to provide for the immediate withdrawal of its troops from that country. TI1c Ministers condemn any attempt against the national unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro Islands and reaffirm their absolute support to its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity."6 1 OS. Finally, on the recommendation of the Security Council of the United Nations, which is contained in resolution 376 (1975), the General Assembly in its resolu- tion 3385 (XXX) of 12 November 1975, admitted by acclamation the young State of the Republic of Comoros and at the same time reaffirmed the need to respect the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro archi~elago composed of the islands of Grande-Comore, AnJOUan, Moheli and Mayotte. 106. The analysis that I have just given clearly demon- strates the regrettable fact that a State Member of the United Nations, a permanent member of the Security Council and a great architect of de colonization for ~o:e than 15 years-the French Republic-seems to be tndif- ferent to so much international pressure, raising doubts about its prestige and its honour by clinging to a piece of land in a poor, defenceless country that has just recently acceded to independence. Indeed, France doe~ n?t even wish to justify its position by the use of convmcmg and logical arguments. 4 See Offlcilll Records of the GeneraOtssembly, Thirtieth Session, Plenory Meetings, 2402nd meeting. 5 Ibid., Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 23, chap. XII, para. 6. 6 See document A/10217 and Corr.1, annex, para. 41. 108. The Government of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea repeats its condemnation of such acts. We trust that the French Government will co-operate in ensuring that these measures will be cancelled. 109. It is unfortunate that a stop could not have been put to these actions that are illegal and contrary to the spirit of the United Nations Charter and the principles of interna- tional law by the Security Council of the United Nations when it met to consider this question from 4 to 6 February 1976. That failure to stop these actions was the result of the use of the veto by a certain permanent member of the Security Council to defend the selfish interests of a few. 110. Faced by these persistent attempts of the colonial Powers to perpetuate colonialism, nee-colonialism and imperialism, the international community must now take an unambiguous decision. Ill. With reference to the Comorian island of Mayotte, the Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-aligned Countries, meeting at Colombo from 16 to 19 August 1976, laid down the point of departure, and the Government of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea hopes that it will be accepted and ratified by this General Assembly. 112. International relations in the world of today require interdependence rather than dependence. That is why the Government of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea believes that if the Western Powers wish to maintain their influence in the Indian Ocean, .they could do so better within the context of interdependence than through military occupa- tion by force. 113. Like representatives who have preceded me to this rostrum, I should like to emphasize that if France, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. China the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America are indivisible countries, then the Republic of the Comoros is also an indivisible country. . 114. In conclusion, I should be remiss in my duty if I did not congratulate Mr. Kurt Waldheim, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, on the outstanding work he has been doing for our Organization, and especiall~ on t~e clear and concise report he has submitted to this session of the Assembly on the work of the Organization for the year 1975/1976 [A/31/1 and Add.1]. On be~alfo~the G~vern­ ment of the Republic of Equatorial Gumea. Its President- for-Life and the delegation that I have the honou~ to hea~. 1 wish to reaffirm our confidence in the leadership of this international Organization.

Th~ · attitude of the Government of France towards the tern- 116. Last year the Tanzanian delegation had the oppor· tunity to give a detailed history of the struggle for independence by the people of the Comoro islands. We gave a detailed account of the manoeuvres which France had employed to foil that struggle. Yet, overcoming all those difficulties, the people of the Comoros declared their independence on 6 July 197 5. 11 7. The independence of the Comoros was a major defeat of French colonialism. But it is obvious now that France is refusing to accept that defeat, and to prove its point it has decided to occupy the island of Mayotte in spite of the fact that when this Assembly admitted the Comoros as a Member of the United Nations it clearly recognized the territorial integrity of the Comoro Islands as comprising the four islands of Anjouan, Grande-Comore, Mayotte and Moheli. 118. France tries to justify its occupation of Mayotte under the smoke-screen of the self-determination of the people of that island. Here I can only repeat what the Permanent Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania, Ambassador Salim, stated in this Assembly on 12 November 1975: "It has been argued that through such a referendum the people of Mayotte will be enabled to exercise their right to self-determination. But why does France choose to ignore the referendum that it organized in the four islands in December 1974? What sort of new principle of self-determination is the Government of France wishing to invoke, in complete violation of the General Assembly resolutions and, in particular, in flagrant violation of the provisions of resolution 1514 (XV), which specifically stip.tlates that any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a Territory is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter. "Have words really lost their meaning? How can one possibly invoke the principle of self-determination to compartmentalize and Balkanize a Territory? ... ''Is this a serious conception of self-determination? It is certainly not a United Nations conception. If the promo· tion of self-determination-as encouraged by France-is to be taken to its logical conclusion, then one can envisage a situation where that principle could be applied to a region, a province, a district or even a vill~ge. I re~lly wonder how many countries Members of this Orgamza- tion, not excluding France, would emerge unaffected if 120. Furthermore, there is plenty of evidence to show that France has been singularly hostile to the new Republic of the Comoros. Only a few days ago the representative of the Government of the Comoros informed the General Assembly of the various manoeuvres France had employed in the initial period to strangle and suffocate the new nation. All technical, financial and economic assistance was withdrawn by France. 121. The present statement is not motivated by a desire to enter into an exercise of recrimination with France. We speak because we are convinced that France's occupation of Mayotte, which is an integral part of the Republic of the Comoros, is an act of aggression against that Republic and constitutes a serious threat to the peace of the region. The Comorian people have a right to demand-and we support them in this-that France withdraw immediately from Mayotte, so that they can once again live as one people in conditions of unity and peace. 122. Tanzania is one of the sponsors of draft resolution A/31 /L.3 and Corr.l introduced here yesterday by the Ambassador of Cameroon. The objective of this draft, as indeed the objective of the discussion of the issue in our Assembly, is clear and unambiguous. It is to demand that France respect the territorial integrity of the Comoro Republic by withdrawing from Mayotte. 123. A vote for the draft resolution is therefore a vote for justice and a defence of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. It is our hope that France will get a clear message from our deliberations here-namely, that it should desist forthwith from its current erroneous course of action, which can only lead to further alienation in its relations not just with the Comoros but, indeed, with the entire African continent. Furthermore, what this draft resolution does is to call on France to embark on a path of legality rather than illegality, a course of co-operation rather than confrontation. Above all, we are only demand- ing that France remain true to its own commitment, given to the United Nations through its representatives before the Comoros became independent. For let it not be forgotten that the Government of France did ass~:~re the United Nations that it would respect the unity and territorial integrity of the islands. Let it not be forgotten that France did undertake to respect the results of the global referen- dum of December 1974.

I now have the honour of presenting the revised version of draft resolution A/31/L.3/ Rev .I, dated 20 October 1976, which .will be available 126. The new draft resolution, while reaffirming the need to safeguard the unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of the Comoros-because this is the corner-stone, the very crux and the fundamental principle of this draft resolution-expresses our profound desire that this problem be resolved in a way which would, on the one 127. The Comorian cause is a just one, falling as it dues within the context of the principles of our Organization, the corner-stone of an international order which we wish to be just, equitable and peaceful. This just cause of the Republic of the Comoros deserves the overwhelming support of all delegations.