A/32/PV.106 General Assembly

Before the Assembly takes r decision on the draft resolution before it, I call on the representative of Cyprus.

It is, I believe, rather unusual to speak on the report of the Security Council [A/32/2] . The practice over the years has been to adopt a draft resolution simply taking note of the report as a matter of course and without further ado. However, this is but the legacy from the cold war period when the Security Council has become paralysed through the repeated exercise of veto-l think it was used more than 100 times-and in consequence the question of the necessary implementation of any Security Council resolution through the procedures provided for such implementation by the Charter was not an issue. And this continued for a great many years- NEW YORK probably, in effect, for the first 25 years of the existel1ce of the United Nations. 3. However, thereafter there was, by reason of the relaxation of tension, a period of detente in which many decisions were taken on various matters by agreement between the sides previously contending in the cold war. In that relaxation of tension we reached a time when unanimous Security Council decisions became possible. Then gradually the question of implemerLtation emerged as an issue. 4. What happens now that the Security Council is no longer hampered in its function by the exercise of the veto? What happens with the resolutions that are adopted? For so many years we complained that the veto was hampering the function of the United Nations, and we all concentrated on how we could get rid of the veto, but it was very difficult to do so. Now, however, another and more serious problem arises. The disappearance of the veto on many questions and the resulting unanimous adoption of resolutions have revealed to the whole world the incapacity of the Security Council to function at all, whether there is a veto or not. And one wonders: what need is there to try to change the Charter-as I know that many members here feel is necessary-to get rid of the veto?· What would b~ the purpose of such a change if, eVC'i1 without the veto, "Ne cannot implement the resolutions? And those resolutions are not intended to be framed and kept as mementos but, -rather, are meant to have an effect. 5. Therefore, the time has come for the General Assembly to consider this matter under Article 11) paragraph 2, of the Charter. The General Assembly has a responsibility and a right to watch over and to make recommendations concerning what is happening with regard to the Security Council. And if what is happening is contrary to any sense of legal order and international security, then something must be wrong, and if there is something wrong, it must be remedied. Otherwise, we are really abandoning any concept of the United Nations and have here only perfunctory appearances and speeches without any intent to take action. 6. Therefore~ we have to examine this situation in some detrJl. I shall not keep the Assembly long since this is the end of the session, but this is an important matter, and unfortunately it does not come before the Genet:'al Assembly until the closing days. There is enough time to deal with separate problems in e.."'(tenso, but no time is given to the primary function of the United Nations in mairtaining international peace and security, from which the various problems arise. If there was a legal order properly functioning in the Security Council we should not have this proliferation of items before the General Assembly on local 8. Of course, the reason why I am bringing this up is our interest as a Member of the United Nations and member of the international community in ensuring that there should be legal order in the world. ,'"'he fact that this is not being raised because of the situatior. in Cyprus can be seen fcoln our statements in the General J-~ssembly in 1961, 1962 and other years, in whi,:h we referred to the need far having a Unitec l..Jations force, as provided for ill the CharLer, for the mainteJlance of international pe&{;e and ~ecurity, because without enforcement action we could h~ve neither peace nor security in the world. 9. Now the time has come when Cyprus has been one of the most manifest victims of aggression and one of the most appalling instances of the non-functioning of the Security Council. That Council has repeatedly passed unanimou::; resolutions for the cessation of the interventiol.:. for the withdrawal of the occupation force and for the return of the refugees to their homes. In spite of these urgent and repeated resolutions, nothing at all has happened. The situation deteriorates by reason of the faits accomplis carried out by an emboldene'~ invader, and still nothing happens. This is a case in poir. t for everyone to consider, but I will now leave Cyprus and its problems and go to the main issue itself. 10. I have said that this issue really arose in the 19708, and it started with the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security [resolution 2734 (XXV)]. That Declaration was adopted in 1970, when the possibility of decisions in the Security Council became more prominent, and the Declaration in its paragraph 9: "Recommends that the Security Council take steps to facilitate the conclusion of the agreements envisaged in Article 43 of the Charter in order fully to develop its capacity for enforcement action ...". Article 43 of the Charter provides that the Members of the United Nations undertake-it is an obligation- "... to make available to the Security Council, on its call and in accordance with a special agreement or agreements, armed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage ...". . It goes on to state in paragraph 3: The agreement or agreements shall be negotiated as soon as possible ...". Here we find a mandatory req11irement on the Security Council: the Security C.ouncil shah l1egotiate agreements. If the Security Council fails to negotiate agreements, it fails in its responsibilities under the Charter for the maintenance of international peace and security and it is accountable for that to the General Assembly. The General Assembly has to 11. Now a year has passed, but nothing has happened. The Security Council did not proceed, in accordance with the recommendations, to the agreements envisaged in Article 43,. Therefore the reM>lution adopted by the General :\ssembly in 1976 specifically caUed again on the Security Council and made a recommendation in resolution 31/92, on the implementation of the Declaration en the Strengthening of Internation~jSecurity. In paragraph 7 that reso"ution states: "Recommends that the SecmJty Council should consi ler appropriate steps towards carrying out effectively, '..5 provided in the Chart~r and the Declaration on th~ Strengthening ')f International Security~ its primary respon..ibility for the maintenanc~ ef i:,temational p.;;ace and S:::'''' uity". 12. This ff'ar the General Assembly has adopted a fl'rther resolution on the implementation of the De-.;J~ratil')n 0"1 th~ Str,;~gthening cf International Security in document A/32/4S0. This resolution in its of;erative paragraph 1 reiterates its rec{1ITtrnendation. That is', it re<;omn:~~l(lswith more emphasis .t31at the S~cmity Council sh'Juld ·.:ons~df'r appropriate st$PS towards ccfly:ng \l'l.!t effectlve!y. as provided in ~he Chart,~r ancl in the Dec:laratiOI~ on th~ Strengthening of !i1temational Gecurrity, :ts pr; JUa!'~' responsibility fOil tIle main:e:1ance of in'ie na+ion~i lJeacc and securit)l. !3. So in thi:; situation the Security Coui~cii has a duty to act, and it was reminded of this duty by the General Asserntly in the resoluHon on ihe implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security. Furthermore, this request was made on particular problems, and I would cite the r~'5rlation on Cy. ' ~~, ,~solution 31/12 of last year, which in paragraph 5 stat<::s: "Expresses the hope that the Security Council will consider appropriate steps for the implementation of its resolution 365 (1974) of 13 December 1974". 14.. This year, again, the General Assembly has adopted a more emphatic resolution, resolution 32/15, which in its paragraph 5: "Recommends that the Security Council shoul~ keep the question of Cyprus under constant review and adopt all practical means to pmmote the effective implementation of its relevant resolution~ in all their aspects". 15. Also, a number of other resolutions of the General Assembly are converging towards impressing upon the Security Council the need to implement its resolutions. Among them, General Assembly resolution 32{34 of 28 Novemher 1977 on East Timor, states in its paragraph 6: "Draws the attention of the Security Council, in conformity with Article 11, pafagraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations, to the critical situation in the 16. There is also a resolution on Southern Rhodesia, which in paragraph 7 requests the Security Council to impose a mandatory embargo on the supply of petroleum and thus cans for enforcement action {resolution 321116Bl· 17. furthermore, we h?-..e in the report of the Secretary- Gene'!Jl on the work of the Organization very emphatic statements in this regard in the past two years. As I say, this problem has arisen recently, and we know why. It has arisen recently because of what I have mentioned before in the blatant cases of vio1:tions of 61e Charter and the Security Council resolutions. The Secretary-General writes the following in his report of this year: "... the primary functior of the United Nations {is] the m~intenance of mtema~ior.al peace and security ..." {see A/32/1, sect. Ill. 18. In his rr.:pert last yerhe wrote: "The Charter is et~af as to t~llj primary role of th( Security Council in matters of T.eace and security and the respect whict £s cue te its c1Fc/sions. While it is a fact that the enforceme~!t aspect 01 thf; Security Council's fl.lllcHons has never become a fuil political reality, it should not be ar;cepted that the Council's decisions can be ignored v~'hen they do not happen to suit the immediate purpose of one or another Government ... "The Charter concept of world order is based on respect for the decisions of the principal organs of the United Nationr."-one of which is the Security Council- "and for international law, principles and procedures. If these are ignored, the system of the Charter for maintaining international peace and security... will inevitably become a hollow shell which will have little utility when it is needed most-when world peace is seriously threatened. We have had many recent experiences of the wide discrepancy between the unanimity, or near unanimity, of decisions of the Security Council or of the General Assembly and the little practical effect which such decisions have on the issues to which they are addressed." 1 19. Obviously, Cyprus is a case in point here. In his report this year the Secretary-General wrote: "... the Security Council held more meetings last year than ever ... However, it would be naive to pretend that the influence of the Security Council is commensurate with the number of meetings it holds. On the contrary, there is, or should be, a general anxiety about the capacity of the Council, in the present political Circumstances, to fulfil the task entrusted to it by the Charter, the maintenance of ... peace and security. It is essential that its capacity for this central function shoulj not be lost sight of. The Council is, or was intended to be, the 20. It is therefore of th~ highest importance for the General Ass~mbly nO'.v a~sembled here to consider this problem, which goes to the very essence of the United Nations and the raison d'etre of its existence and of world order under the Charter. 21. The Secretary-General in his report last year wen~ on to say: "The responsibilities of Governments do not cease when. a resolution is adopted; indeed resolutions usually . req;.lire determined action by Governments, in addi ~ion to thf: parties directly concerned, if they are to be tra'J.slated ir.:~o realit/.-'2 22. Therefon:, the responsibility for implememL'1g the resolutions of the Security Couiicil does not res only on the particular parties that" are called upon to comply with those resolutions but on every Member of the United Nations. Moreover, every Member of the United Nations has the responsibility, according t6 the Secretary-General, to contribute to the implementation of the resolutions. 23. 'Vhat the Secretary-General says here is completely consistent with the Charter. In Chapter I, entitled "Purposes and Principles", Article 2, paragraph, -a cardinal principle of the Charter-says: "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force ...". That is the principle which makes the use of force prohibited. It is supplemented immediately thereafter by Article 2, paragraph 5, which states that: "All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter"-meaning enforcement action-"and shall refrain from giving assistance to any State against which the United Nations is taking preventing or enforcement action." 24. Those two principles therefore make it clear that, if we are going to have a United Nations under the Charter, force must be prohibited effectively and all t.::n1:'~rs, not only those upon which Security Council resolutiuns call, shall contribute to the enforcement action of the United Nations. 25. That principle is translated into procedural effectiveness by Article 24 of the Charter, which confers on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and which, in paragraph 2, says that: "In discharging these duties the Security Council shall act in accordance with the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations" and in accordance with "the specific 27. Then comes the actually effective Article, Article 39, which confers a mandate on the Security Council: "The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall decide what measures shall"-not may-"be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42"-the Articles dealing with enforcement action-"to maintain or restore international peace and security." 28. The Security Council, therefore, has not only the duty of saying that there is an act of 2ggression and calling for troops to be withdrawn and so on but also the duty to decide what action it should take under Articles 41 and 42 to enforce that decision. One of the primary funtions is in Article 43 with regard te agreements which shall be negotiated between States. The Charter here says that the agreements shall be negotiated as soon as possible for a United Nations peace force to contribute to the mainte- nance of international security. 29. Hence there is no doubt that, in light of the present situation of widely growing anarchy and insecurity in the world, the time has come for action in this respect. I have no doubt that the Security Council will heed the recom- mendations of the General Assembly that I have mentioned here and that it will act accordingly. I believe that the first step for the Security Council is to proceed under Article 43, as mentioned in the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security, which was adopted unanimously, to negotiate agreements to establish a stand-by United Nations force ready to be called upon for enforcement action whenever necessary. 30. We know that there is the general impression that there are many difficulties. But whatever these difficulties are, they are minimal when compared to the difficulties, dangers and destruction involved in a world of growing international anarchy and insecurity. I would suggest that, if the Security Council feels that there are difficult problems for it to tackle in this respect, it could very well-and I am sure that the General Assembly would assist in this-have a study prepared by experts or the Secretariat to see how we could proceed with the implementation of these provisions of the Charter in our present-day world and in the situation as it now stands. 31. I thiPk that there is a hopeful note here by the fact that there has already been enforcement action taken by the Security Council with respect to the embargo against . South Africa; hence, we have already embarked upon the implementation of Security Council resolutions. I hope that matters will be considered in this light and in a spirit of co-operation by all Members in order that there should be legal order and international security in the world, thereby promoting the ideals and principles upon which the Charter is based and replacing antagonism and discord by co-opera- tion and love.

The Assembly will first consider the report of the Sixth Committee on agenda item 37, entitled "Conclusion of a world treaty on the non-use of force in international relations: report of the Secretary- General". The report is contained in document A/32/466. 39. I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their vote before the vote.

I have the honour to speak today on behalf of the nine States members of the European Community. We can only solemnly reaffirm our attachment to the principle of the non-use of force in international relations. However, the nine States members of the European Community unanimously wish to reaffirm the concern that they would feel about any proposal to draft a treaty on the non-use of force. 41. All statements by our delegations in the Sixth Committee expressed the view that in their eyes to prepare such a treaty would by no means be to strengthen the Charter of our Organization. On the contrary, it might well dislodge the keystone of the United Nations system. 43. Similarly, our nine countries believe that priority consideration should also be given to an improvement of the means for the peaceful settlement of disputes. 44. As regards the preparation of an additional legal instrument, the States of the European Community can only reaffirm the doubts that they expressed in the Committee that such a draft could serve any useful purpose.

During the First Committee debate on item 37 concerning the non-use of force in international relations, as well as during the voting in the Sixth Committee on the draft resolution that is now contained in paragraph 9 of document A/32!466, the delegation ofthe People's Socialist Republic ofAlbaniamade its position and viewpoints abundantly clear. However, before the General Assembly takes a decision on that draft resolution the Albanian delegation would like to reiterate its position as follows. 46. As became evident in the discussions relating to this que3tion during last year's session; as well as during the current one, the Soviet social-imperialists have exploited the debate on item 37, which was included in the agenda at their insistence, to make a propaganda fuss for demagogical purposes to cpver up their aggressive policy and activity. But the facts show that the two imperialist super-Pow~rs­ the United States and the Soviet Union-while raising a big hue and cry on the non-use of force in international relations for aggressive purposes are "in reality Ih'actising far and wide their interference in other countries' internal affairs. It is they who ar~ in fact using f0rce and the threat of force in order to carry out their expansionist and hegemonistic goals in the world. 47. Facts prove, similarly, that, when the interests of their aggressive policies so require, international norms, principles, treaties and other international legal documents have not prevented the two imperialist super-Powers and the various reactionary forces from using force and violence, or even an open form of aggression. 48. The development of the international situation proves that the two super-Powers have not cared in the slightest about the United Nations Charter or other international treaties and documents when it comes to using force for attaining their expansionist and hegemonistic goals. They will never give up the use of force of their own accord; much less can it be expected that they will do so simply because an international treaty on the non-use of force in international relations has been concluded. On the contrary, they view the conclusion of such a treaty as another means and opporiunity to lull the vigilance of the peoples and to camouflage their own aggressive activities. 49. Therefore, the Albanian delegation will vote against the draft resolution contained in the Sixth Committee's report. 51. No one can deny that the time has come-if it is not already too late-for the international community to insist on scmpulous adherence to the principle of non-use of force in international relations. No one can deny that the violation of this principle would result in grave consequences that could wreak upon the international community ruin and destruction. The First and Second World Wars have wrought havoc upon humanity at large to an extent that cannot be described, and the international community continues to suffer their consequences to this very day. The wars which flared up in Korea, Viet Nam and the Middle East are vivid examples before our very eyes, and constitute a strong impetus that should urge us to insist on applying the principle of the non-use of force in international relations. 52. My delegation would have wished the sponsors of the draft resolution to accept the constitution of a Special Committee charged with studying this matter and with submitting its recommendations to the Gen~ral Assembly at its next session-a session which might be more successful and effective even if these recommendations concerned the conclusion of an international convention. Had this been realized we would have achieved better results, for on the one hand that might have led to a consensus on this decision, and on the other the recommendations of the Special Committee would have been welcomed by the majority, if not by all, of the nations of the world. 53. The wording included in operative paragraph 2 of the draft resolution "or such other recommendations as the Committee deems appropriate" was used in order to satisfy the others and in order to achieve success. This is because the term "as the Committee deems appropriate" contradicts the previous phrase, because, after having established the purpose for which the Committee was constituted-that is, a draft international convention on the non-use of force in international relations-we call upon it afterwards to provide us with other recommendations. This is what we expect. 54. No one here can prophesy the fate of this convention for, as my colleague from the Ivory Coast has said during the debate in the Sixth Committee; "We must not place it in the museum of conventions". After all these efforts and the expenses incurred, especially since the United Nations suffers a well-known financial crisis, such a resolution would have imposed an additional fmancial burden without attaining the objective we all seek from such an endeavour. 55. Would not the Charter have been better than the convention, since it provides in many of its articles for the non-use of force? In spite of this VIe still find that the language of force is the prevailing language in international relations. 57. From this rostrum I would like to put on record that we strongly support the enhancement of this important principle, which ranks among the most cardinal principles of the United Nations although we differ on the method. In view of the foregoing my delepation will abstain in the vote on the draft resolution in document A/32/466. I would also like to put on record that we do not want this to be construed as meaning that we support the use of force in international relations. Our position is to reserve our attitude until we are in possession of the conclusions of the Special Committee-conclusions which we hope will be satisfactory ones and which will be most fruitful in the near future in fulfilling the aim of peace and stability for mankind.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Sixth Committee hi paragraph 9 of its report, document A/ 32/466. The draft resolution is entitled "Conclusion of a world treaty on the non-use of force in international relations". The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/32/471. A recorded vote has been requested. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Baha- mas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Boli- via, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelo- russian Soviet Socialist Republic, Central African Empire, Chile, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, J)emocratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethio- pia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauri- tius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Roma- nia, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Surinam, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: Albania, China, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chad, Denmark, France, Germany, Federal Republic of , Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Liberia, Luxem-

Under paragraph 1 of the resolution just adopted, the General Assembly has decided to establish a Special Committee on Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Principle of Non-Use of Force in International Relations, composed of 35 Member States to be appointed by the President of the General Assembly on the basis of equitable geographical distribution and representing the principal legal systems of the world. I shall report to the General Assembly on that matter at a later stage.3 60. We shall turn now to the report of the Sixth COmJiuttee on agenda item 112 [A/32/433]. The General Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution entitled "Report of the International Law Commission, which has been recommended by the Sixth Committee in paragraph 251 of its report. The Sixth Committee adopted that draft resolution by consensus. May I consider that the Assemb.y also adopts it?

We have concluded our consideration of all the items allocated to the Sixth Committee. May I, on behalf of the General Assembly, thank all ~e members of the Sixth Committee present here for their very successful work?

We turn first to the report of the First Committee on agenda item 38 [A/32/369]. The General Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. The draft resolution is entitled "Incendiary and other specific convention2.1 weapons which may be the subject of prohibitions or restrictions of use for humanitarian reasons". The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in .document A/32/425. A recorded vote has been requested.

We shall now revert to the consideration of agenda item 37, entitled "Conclusion of a world treaty on the non-use of force in international relations". I now invite representatives to turn their attention to the decision of the First Committee contained in paragraph 5 of its report [A/32/449). May I consider that the General Assembly takes note of that decision?

We turn now to the report of the First Committee on agenda item 50rA/32/450J. 69. I :::hall now call on those representatives wishing to explain their votes before the vote. 70. Mr_ KAPLLANI (Albania): The Albanian delegation did not take part in the vote on draft resolution 11 in paragraph 9 of the First Committee's report when it was adopted in the Committee, and stated that it had reservations as regards that draft resolution, especially those paragraphs which refer to the Helsinki Conference and the Belgrade meeting on sOecalled European security and co-operation. Now that the General Assembly is about to take a decision on the draft resolution the Albanian delegation would like to reiterate its reservations concern- "ing the above draft resolution. 71. In particub:, we wish to state our viewpoint that the Helsinki Conference on so-called European security and 4 The delegation {.f !htrma subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wished to have its vote recorded as having been in favour of the draft resolution. 72. In view of the above considerations, the delegation of the People's Socialist Republic of Albania is not going to participate in the vote on the draft resolution contained in the report of the First Committee.

My delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution 11 contained in document A/32/450. We subscribe to all the principles reaffIrmed in this draft resolution and, as we have in the past, we shall continue to implement these principles. 74. But we would like to make one point clear. Our understanding is that the movements mentioned in operative paragraph 3 are laational liberation movements recognized as such by the United Nations, because they have been recognized as such by the Organization of African Unity and the League of Ar2h States, to the exclusion ofall pseudo-movements concocted for hegemonistic and criminal purposes. 75" We consider that the activities of such pseudo-movements of mercenaries are those which have already been condemned by draft resolution I on non-interference in ~e internal affairs of States contained in the same report of the First Committee under item 50, particularly in operative paragraph 2, which reads as follows: "Calls once again upon all States, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of c.he United Nations, to undertake necessary measures in order to prevent any hostile act or activity taking place within their territory and directed against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of another State".

We have heard the last speaker in explanation oC-vote before the vote. 77" The Assembly will now proceed to take a decision on the two draft resolutions recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 9 of its report [.11/32/450J. Draft resolution I is entitled "Non-interference in the internal affairs ofStates". A recorded vote has been requested" Against: None. Abstaining: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern· Ireland, United States of America.

I shall now put to the vote draft resolution II, entitled "Implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security." A recorded vote has been requested.

I call on the representative of Benin, who wishes to explain his vote after the vote.

My delegation voted in favour of draft resolution I under agenda item 50, entitled "Non-intervention in the internal affairs of States". Because my delegation is so small it was not able to take part in the discussion of that ~tem ~ the First Committee. 81. My delegation believes this item to be an extremely important one. My country, the People's Republic of Benin, which was the victim of an act of aggression on 16 January 197'1, is very well placed to assess the voting on this important item. 82. Imperialist forces throughout the world are the primary cause of acts of aggression committed against defenceless States. We voted in favour of the draft resolution, but we feel that we sl1('~.ld have included provisions on international mercenaries, the weapon being used today against defenceless States in an attempt to destabilize them and disrupt their economies. 83. My delegation believes that at the next session we will be in a pm'Won to make some proposals in the First Committee.

The Assembly will now consider the report 'Jf the First Committee on agenda item 127, entitled "Deepening and consolidation of international detente and prevention of the danger of nuclear war", which is contained in document A/32/451. The General Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the First Committee in paragraph 8 ofits report, which is entitled "DeclaratiG~lon the Deepening and Consolidation of International Detente". The First Committee adopted that draft resolution by consensus. May I take it that the General Assembly decides to do the same?

I shall now call on representatives who wish to explain their positions on the resolution just adopted

The General Assembly has just adopted by consensus a Declaration under the item entitled "Deepening and consolidation of international detente and prevention of the danger of nuclear war". 88. The delegation of the People's Socialist Republic of Albania would like to explain its position on the consensus and the document that has just been adopted. In the debate in the First Committee on agenda item 127, the Albanian delegation set forth its views on the so-called detente and prevention of nuclear war. 89. The Albanian delegation also explained its attitude in the First CommitteeS when that Committee approved the Declaration on the Deepening and Consolidation of International Detente and the Prevention of Nuclear War contained in document A/32/451. For that reason the Albanian delegation does not deem it necessary to set forth at length once again its views; we should simply like to stress the following. 90. The Soviet social-imperialists have iIllPosed the inclusion ofitem 127 in the agenda solely to make a demagogic uproar here in the United Nations. Their proposal was not at all inspired by the desire to serve the aspirations of mankind, its only pur{)ose being to camouflage its policy and aggressive designs. Their objective was to extract from the General Assembly, at all costs, a document that they could exploit for their own ends in the future, as they have done with so many other documents in the past. 91. It is our feeling that the course of events, and the complicated international situation fraught with danger make it clear that there has been and is no detente in the world. It would not be realistic, therefore, to talk of detente or the deepening of detente when we know that the two imperialist super-Powers-the Soviet Union and the United States-and various reactionary forces are continuing their aggressive policies and engaging ceaselessly in acts of war and aggression against countries and peoples which love peace and liberty. In our view, it should also be stressed that the two imperialist super-Powers are using slogans of "detente", "prevention of nuclear war" and others as means of camouflaging and jusifying their rivalry and bargaining to achieve world domination and hegemony and to claim the right to be international judges and policemen. The two imperialist super-Powers are relying treIllendously on the horrors of a nuclear war and slogans ~oncerning the prevention of such a war to intimidate and deceive people. But we cannot close our eyes to the incontestable fact that it is precisely the two imperialist super-Powers which constitute the greatest danger of war 93. For those reasons the Albanian delegation does not accept the consensus and does not associate itself with it.

The Somali delegation expressed in the First Committee doubts about the fonnulation of certain parts of the declaration contained in document A/32/451. In particular, we found it necessary to reserve our positin.n with regard to operative paragraph 5. 95. I wish to point out that a close examination of that paragraph reveals that, while it refers to quite a number of principles, there are important principles of international law, such as the principle of self-determination, of which it makes no mention. 96. The other point in connexion with that operative paragraph to which we want to draw the attention of the Assembly is that the manner in which the principles have been set out not only is vague, congested anci ambiguous, but is such as to admit of serious short-cornings and divergent interpretations.' Take, for example, the principle relating to the inviolability of international frontiers. How could that be interpreted with regard to the liberation movements operating from neighbouring States in pursuance of their right to self-determina!ion and freedom from colonial and/or a!ien rule and occupation of their territory? One can imagine the effect that would have on the legitimate struggle which the liberation movements in southern Africa and elsewhere are conducting for their inalienable right to self-determination and freedom. We strongly believe that among the principles mentioned in that Declaration, the principle of self-determination has an overriding weight. It is our considered opinion that the principle should have been qualified so as to read as folk .vs: "the inviolability of internationally recognized and agreed frontiers". Obviously, an international frontier cannot have only a de facto existence but, to be respected, it should have also legal validity and be recognized and agreed upon as such by the States concerned. 97. It is in the light of these considerations that my delegation registers its reservation with respect to that operative paragraph.

The delegation of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam participated in the consensus on the declaration entitled "Deepening and consolidation of international detente". We should like, however, to make the following comments. First, imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, apartheid and zionism are at the origin of all tensions and conflicts throughout the world. Modem history has shown that everywhere in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, 99. Mr. BAROODY {Saudi Arabia): We accepted the consensus on detente not blindly but with open eyes for the simple reason that at present there can be no alternative to the unsatisfactory state of the world. If we were not to have wh~t we call "detente", what would be the alternative? Suffice it for me to say that history aff:)::is us a few examples. 100. After the fall of Napoleon and the Congress of Vienna, there was detente for about 30 years. Then came the revolutions of 1848. After the Congress of Berlin in Europe in 1878, we had detente also for about 30 years, and then came the First World War. After the Second World War, we could not afford anything but detente because of the weapons of mass destruction that were devised and used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, leaving aside other diabolical weapons of mass destruction that are in the process of being invented. 101. Therefore, we had no choice but to accept detente. Let us not be so credulous as to think it is a magic wand: that by merely repeating the word we shall establish peace in the world. Before the word "detente" was used, it will be recalled, during the Khmshchev era when there was a sort of dialogue taking place between the Soviet Union and the United States, the term used was "coexistence". Now we are engaging in semantics in this Organization. What is the difference between coexistence and detente? The word "detente" seems to be fashionable nowadays. 102. The only alternative would be more conflict, if we did not have that spirit of coexistence, otherwise called detente. What would happen? Does anyone want a nuclear 103. But it is not in the cards as yet, because many of the leaders of the world do not have a new approach. We depend on the new generation to pave the way for that approach. I, for one, would say that those who spoke against detente has valid arguments. But then I ask them, what is the alternative under the present conditions? If th~y have a prescription, let us know what it is. I say this with all due respect to my friends from China, who 2Ie Asiails, to my Albanian friends and to our colleague from Viet Nam, who represents a country that has suffered terribly. This is why it is not surprising to find a reaction on the part of China and of Viet Nam, not"ing what humanity has gone through, including those they consider as aggressors or imperialists. They, too, lost their sons and a lot of their patrimony in the war in Viet Nam., 104. Therefore, again I must say that there is no alternative for the time being. Although it may sound platitudinous to repeat semantics. whether it ~s "coexistence" or "detente", I still th;nk that, with patience and barring miscalculations that might lead to a world conflict, detente-or coexistence, if one wants to use the earlier terms-seems to be not a panacea-not at all-but rather what the Americans in this country call a "stop-gap" measure until sometIlli.g better can be worked out. Therefore, our pray('r at the end of this session would be that d6tente at the right time wilL indeed, lead to entente. Not the entente of the European Powers, which in recent history also divided the world into sections, agreeing that "That is yours and this is mine; scratch my back and I will scratch yours". No, not this policy of entente, but entente based on the brotherhood of man. llze meeting was adjounzed at 12.45 p.m