A/32/PV.55 General Assembly

The first speaker this afternoon will be the representative of Sri Lanka, who will introduce draft resolution A/32/L.12 and Add.1 and 2.

It is my privilege today, on behalf of the 68 sponsors of draft resolution A/32/L.12 and Add.1 and 2, to present this draft resolution to this Assembly today. 3. Yesterday [53rd meetingj my colleague speaking in this debate stated in very succinct terms the position that Sri Lanka has taken -on this question. That position was clearly set out in the resolution adopted at the Fifth Conference of He:&ds of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, held in Colombo in August 1976.1 It is a position that is shared by other organizations representing the interests of many of the members of the third world, countries that have experienced colonialism in all its forms, namely, the Organization of African Unity fOAUj and other organi- zations such as the League of Arc.:t} States and the Isl~mic Conference. 4. Before making any observations on the draft resolution. itself, I should like to make some comments on the arguments advanced by the representative of France yester- day in his statement to this Assembly [53rd meetingj. At the outset, I must confess that I cannot reconcile many of those arguments with the statements made by responsible members of the French Government. I shall refer to two or three of those statements. The French Secretary of State for Overseas Departments and Territories stated in August 1974 the French position to the effect that a referendum for the whole of the Comorian archipelago should be held. That position, he stated, had been adopted on the basis of certain legal, practical and moral principles. The legal piinciple wa~ the rule of international law Ihat a Territory retained the frontiers that it had as a colony. The practical reason was that it was inconceivable for any of the four islands constituting the Comoro archipelago to have a status different from that of the others. They all had to have a 1 Sce document A/31/197, annex IV. NAC/CONF.S/S/RES.7. NEW YORK single and uniform juridical and administrative status. The moral reason given by the French Secretary ofState on that occasion was that it did not behove France to turn the Comorians against one another but, on the contrary, it was its duty to contribute to bringing th.em together.2 5. The most authoritative pronouncement, however, came from the President of France himself, who said that the Comoros were an archipelago which constituted a single entity; that the population was homogeneous; and that the Comoros were a single unit, had always been a single unit, and it was natural that their fate should be a common fate. 6. The statement we heard yesterday from the represen- tative of France may not have been intended to be a repudiation of that position and of the high r-cinciples on which it was founded. But the arguments adduced by the representative of France and also certain actions on the French Government's part can only be construed as a repudiation of that position or as so sharp a deviation from that position as to be tantamount to a repudiation ofit and almost an entirely new policy. 7. The fIrst argument advanced by the representative of France was that in the General Committee France had objected to the inclusion of this item in the agenda as it was a violation of the provisions of Article 2, paragraph 7, of the Charter, which prohibits the' United Nations from interfering in the domestic affairs of a State-in this instance, I suppose, the State of France, because I do not believe that the representative of France intended to state that the French Government had taken the Comorian Republic into protective custody. 8. Article 2, paragraph 7, of the Charter prohibits inter- vention by the United Nations in matters which are e~entially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State. In February 1975 the French Secretary of State for Overseas Departments and Territories, that selfsame gentleman, stated-after the referendum of December 1974-that "Mayotte is an internal problem of the Comorians." How, then~ does the m~1tter come essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of France? Was France rejecting the results of the referendum which it had itself agreed should be held in order to ascertain, through a democratic process, the will of the Comorian people as a whole? Did it have any mental reservations when it made the world believe that it would accept the results of that referendum as a lawful and recognized means of self-detennination for the people? In the name of what sort of democracy did it support this act of secession-and it is nothing less than that--on the part of Mayotte? France's present actions and attitudes, we regret 2 See Officio! Records of the General Assemb(J'. Twenty-ninth Session. Supplement No. 23. vot. Ill, chap. XI, annex, para. 32. 9. The results of that referendum are well known to us: 95.5 per cent of the total vote was cast in favour of independence; 4.4 per cent was again~t it. We have the po1f)ulation statistics of the Comorian Republic. The popu- lation of Mayotte is only 35,000, slightly more than 10 per cent of the total population of the four islands of the Comorian archipelago taken together. I do realize that the entire population, infants included, does not participate in a referendum. But the proportions can reasonably be applied in regard to the referendum itself. If 4.4 per cent voted against it, and that entire 4.4 per cent came from Mayotte, there could not have been even a majority of the people ofMayotte against ir~dependence. 10. Some strange sort of arithmetic haS' been applied to the results, unless the wishes of the people of Mayotte have been determined by some means other than the referendum that was treated as common to the entire Comorian Republic. 11. We would appeal to France not to betray its grand traditions and not to forfeit the respect and confidence of all those who have believed in it and still believe in it. We have respected France, and we still respect it. We have looked to France and still look to it to play a role of intellectual and moral leadership in a troubled world, and we still have faith in its capacity to qo so. France can do so only by refraining from taking any action under the guise of a legal fiction that would keep Mayotte separate from the rest of the Comoros and treat the island as a part of French territory. That would be encouraging secession, and nothing less than that. 12. Of what use, I ask the Assembly, is life to an individual or independence to a former colony if you cut the jugular vein on which life itself depends? That is what has beep done in the case of the Comorian Republic. 13. We refuse to believe that such is France's intention towards the Comoros. We refuse to allow France to destroy our faith in its sense of justice and its respect for democracy. We would be making a mockery of decQlo- nization and of the principle of self-determination if we asked sections of a total territorial unit to express their pref~rence independently in regard to their future and their emanci....ation from colonial rule. We should be using self-determination as a pretext for the fragmentation ofthe territory that once constituted a colony. That is not an approach or an attitude or a policy we would expect of a country such as France, with such a wealth of political tradition. 14. J would turn now to the draft resolutiop itself [A/S2/L.12' f!Jld Add.l and 2}. I hope this Assembly will .3ppreciate that the terms of the (:·aft resolution are extremely moderate. There is nothing provocative in it. It 15. I would draw your attention to the last prcambular par~graph, which states: "Bearing in mind the efforts of the Organization of African Unity, e.specially those of its Committee of Seven on the Comorian Island of Mayotte...." J • The CQmmittee of Seven intends th~t:~ontact should be established by them with the ~European Economic Com- munity and the Scandinavian countries in order to secure their support in the effort by the Republic of the Comoros to recover its unity and territorial integrity by ensuring that efforts to secure the separation of Mayotte will not be pursued and that Mayotte will be restored to it. 16. If I may now turn to the operative paragraphs, operative paragraph 1: , "Calls upon the Government of the Comoros and the Government of France to work out et just and equitable settlement for the problem of the Comorian island of Mayotte which respects the political unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros, in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly on this issue...." 17. The representative of France yesterday stated that "a law of 24 December 1976 made Mayotte a territorial collective unit of the French Republic" [53rd meeting, para. 157/. Elsewhere in his stat~ment he said that France "is ready to try to make the dialogue between the Comorians and the inhabitants of Mayotte easier and more fruitful" [ibid., para. 162J. It sounds as if France is ready to allow any country to enter into negotiations with, say, a commune in France or with Paris. It is not consistent, I say, with th~ir position that Mayotte is a territorial collective unit of the French Republic. 1 know that there are many things that a parliament can do; they say a parliament is strong enough to do everytmng ~xcept perhaps change your sex. 18. Operative paragraph 2: "Mandates the Secretary-General to take, in close consultation with the Government of the Comoros and the Government of France, any initiative in favour of negotiations between the two Governments". 19. Operative paragraph 3: "Further requests the Secretary-General of the United Nations to contact the Administrative Secretary-General of the Organization of African Unity with a view to

The General Assembly is now considering the item on tile Comorian island of Mayotte for the second time since it first appeared on the agenda last year. At that time it appealed to the French Government to take the initiative and to negotiate with the Government of the Comorian ~lands with n view to restoring Mayotte to the majority of tt.e people. Resolution 31/4, adopted by the General Assembly at the last session, was an expression of the Assembly's wish to have France renounce this colony and grant independence to this region which is still under its influence. France accepted resolution 1514 (XV) con- taining the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and resolution 3161 (XXVIII), which affirms the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro archipelago, and has agreed to meet the aspirations of the people. France's present quibblings over the return of Mayotte represents a regres- sion in French policy with respect to its promises and international obligations. 22. The referendum of 22 December 1974 was in no way designed to destroy the unity of the Comorian islands or to jeopardize their security. On the contrary, it was designed to permit the free expression of the will of the people of the Comorian islands to rid themselves of the foreign administration. The result of that referendum was unani- mous and left no room for doubt. 23. The parliamentary procedure France proposed-the same as the one which was employed in Djibouti in the 1960s and to which th~ French representative referred yesterday:::"'cannot apply in the case of Mayotte. The resolutions and the unahimous and repeated appeals made by the OAU, the non-aligned countries, the Islamic Con- ference and the United Nations concerning respect for the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros leave no room for any possible eXCUiie or justification the French Government might put forward for deferring the transfer of the island of Mayotte and its administration to the Comorian Government. 24. We call on the French authorities to arrange for the withdrawal of their military forces and their administration from the island of Mayotte. We hope also that the State of the Comorian islands will be able to play a useful role within the framework of the maintenance of the Indian Ocean as a zone of peace, which would be impossible if that State did not have control over the whole of its territory.

One of the main achieve- ments of our age has been the' decline of colonialism all over the world. The United Nations has played a major role 26. The problem of the Comorian island of Mayotte reflects the desperate efforts of colonialism to maintain its sway over that island. 27. All the people of the Republic of the Comoros, through the referendum of 22 December 1974, had expressed by an overwhelming. majority their will to become independent with political unity and territorial integrity. The Comorian island of Mayotte is an integral part of the Republic of the Comoros. Hence, the refer- endum of 22 December 1974 includes the Comorian island of Mayotte, whose people are part and parcel of the Republic of the Comoros. 28. My Government considers the so-called referendum imposed on the inhabitants of the Comorian island of Mayotte as aggression against the whole Comorian people, a violation of the respect due to the sovereignty of the independent State'of the Comoms, and a violation of the right ofself-determination of the Comorian people. 29. The inhabitants of the Comorian island of Mayotte, who are part and parcel of all the people of the Republic of Comoros, are already bound by the referendum of 22 December 1974, which expressed the wishes of all the people of the Republic of Comoros to become independent with political unity and territorial integrity. 30. My delegation whole-heanedly endorses resolution 18/8-P adopted by the Eighth ·Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers, held_at Tripoli from 16 to 22 May of this year, which condemned the so-called referendums of 8 February and 17 April 1976 which it considered null and void, together with any other measure aimed at giving a legal basis to any French colonial presence on the Comorian territory of Mayotte. The resolution called on France to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the young Comorian State and to withdraw immediately its military occupation troops from the Comorian island of Mayotte. My Government opposes any attempt to separate the Comorian island of Mayotte from the Republic of the Comoros. 31. My delegation has consistently opposed the establish- ment of military bases in the Indian Ocean and is actively collaborating with the coastal and hinterland States of that Ocean for the creation of a zone of peace in the region. Hence, we oppose the establishment of military bases in the Comorian island of Mayotte and consider this a threat to peace and security in the area. 32. The Republic of the Comoros should not remain divided on the pretext of a fictitious principle, the application of which would create a very dangerous precedent and could jeopardize the very existence of many States. To apply that principle alone without taking into account the principles of territorial integrity and national unity, which are the elements on which the order and harmony of int~rnationalrelations are based, would create 33. We are confident that France, which has a long history of favouring human values and liberty, equality and fraternity, will heed this calI and withdraw its troops from the Comorian island of Mayotte. By taking that step, it will help the people of Mayotte to fulfil its national aspiration to join their brethren, the people of the Republic of Comoros, thus maintaining the political unity and integrity of the C'omorian national territory of the independent Republic of the Comoros. 34. In conclusion, we cannot help quoting again the official position stated by the President of the French Republic, Mr. Giscard d'Estaing, when he spoke on the future of the Comoros, on 24 October 1974, at a press conference: "[The Comoras] are an archipelago which constitutes a single entity ... The population 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 in· habitants, 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 ...".

Like other delegations who have spoken before us, we speak in this debate in order to appeal to France and to the Comoras to agree through negotiations on a just and equitable solution of the problem of Mayotte. That solution should, we must add, respect the national unity and the territorial integrity ofthe young African State. 36. The position I have just set forth was formulated by the Argentine Government after careful consideration of two essential aspects of the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte. These aspects are, on the one hand, the factual circumstances under which the continuing territorial ampu· tation of the Comoros was perpetrated, and on the other hand, the principles whose recognition and validity arc, in one way or another, affected by the problem. 37. The first of these aspects, concerning the facts, is well known to the General Assembly and does not need to be repeated. The second one, however, requires some addi· tional considerations and, consequently, I will refer to it briefly. 38. The question of the Comorian island of Mayotte reopens the excllange of opinions 011 three principles which play a role which we believe is fundamental in the area of decolonization. These principles are those of the peaceful settlement of disputes t!)rough negotiation, the territorial integrity of States, and finally, the recognition of the individuality of each colonial case and the consequent impossibility of applying one and the same principle to all colonial questions. These three principles, I repeat, consti· tute the basis of the political and regulatory framework 39. The importance of negotiation as a means for the peaceful settlement of disputes does not require emphasis. Negotiation among the parties to a conflict is the very raison d'/Hre of the United Nations, and it constitutes the best means of resolving international crises, and as such has been enshrined in Article 33 of the Charter. Moreover, its validity in the specific area of decolonization is also evident, and my country which has repeatedly advocated the use of this machinery in the colonial question in which it is directly concerned, applauds the emphasis placed by the Comorian authorities on the need to settle the problem of Mayotte peacefully and jointly through negotiations with France. 40. The validity of the principle of territorial integrity in the matter of decolonization is also unquestionable. Para· graph 6 of resolution 1514 (XV) and numerous other pronouncements both by the General Assembly and by the International Court of Justice are quite clear in this respect. 41. One can say more. So great is the value of this principle that the very bodies which I have referred to have repeatedly supported its implementation over and above or in harmony with other principles, such as the principle of self-determination, which are also important elements of the process of decolonization. The reason is that in numerous cases the principle of self-determination applied strictly with respect to the entirety or, as in the case of Mayotte, to part of a colonial State, does not fully meet the objective of the decolonization of territories in conformity with the criterion of due justice. And it does not meet that objective for the simple reason that the geographical or historical peculiarities of certain colonial problems force us to bear in mind and to apply other criteria. 42. It is obvious that what I have just stated relates directly to the third principle to which I referred at the beginning of this statement-that is, the one concerning the individuality of each colonial case and the consequent impossibility of having the principle of self·determination automatically prevail in all territories. 43. The importance of this principle is also unquestion· able, and so it has been repeatedly applied by the principal organs of the United Nations system. 44. It could not be otherwise as the ultimate purpose of the body of rules for decolonization is not to exalt one principle over and above others or to sanction a single formula-except for decolonialization itself-to be applied without exception to all colonial territories regardless of specific circumstances. In other words, the purpose is to enable peoples and States which are dominated or terri· toriaUy fragmented as a consequence of colonial expansion, in each case and according to the various principles applicable, to exercise their right to self-determination or to recover the territory of which they have been iJIegally deprived. 45. My delegation, though convinced of the good faith of the French Government in its approach to the problem of the Comorian island of Mayotte and while we understand 46. In conclusion, we therefore appeal to the Fr~nch Government, on the basis of these elements, to adopt towards Mayotte the same realistic approach which, pre- cisely because it knew how to respond with political imaghiation to the requirements of each specific case, permiti:ed the peaceful and harmonious independence of its former colonies. Action along these lines would not only satisfy the Afric~n States in general and the Republic of the Comoros in partkwar but would also serve to reaffirm the l10ble standards of behaviour which have helped. to cement the moral stature and the greatness of France and, to a large extent, to inspire the lofty principles and pUrr,OS(;~ of this Organization.

This is one debate that the General Assembly could have been spared hari .he Gove~.lU11ent of France livet:. up to its obligations and responsf.Jilities. For it is France's failure properly to fulfil its re~pomibiIities as the administering Power that has consequent y led to the present situation where t.~e i.e17itorial ir tegrity and the sovereignty of the Republic of the Comoros, a State Member of our Organization, con- tinue to be violated. 48. I realize that in saying this I am only stating the obvious. Yet there are times when the obvious needs to be restated if only to dispel attempts at confusing the issue. 49. My country, whose people are linked with the people of the Comoros through strong bonds of brotherhood, solidarity and kinship, has through our delegation at the United Nations dealt with the question of the Comeros for a number of years before that fraternal State emerged as a sovereign, independent State. We have done so, first in the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, then in the Fourth Committee, and subsequently in the United Nations General Assembly. 50. Tanzania, together with the other African States, has consistently espoused and defended the legitimate rights of the Comorian people, first in their struggle for self-deter- mination and independence, and secondly in the preser- vation of their unity and territorial integrity. I have given this historical expose in order to underscore one point: this is that the records will show that, whereas there were differences between the French Government and the African States over many aspects of the question of the Comoros-such as, for example, the pace of decolonization or the merits and demerits of United Nations involvement in the actual decolonization process-there was no diver- gence of view on the issue whi,;h now bedevils free Africa's relations with France. Through@ut the greater part of the consideration of the colonial question of the Comoros, the , 51. This Assembly is aware of the many statements made by eminent spokesmen of France to this effect. Reference has a~ready been made to the statement made by the French Secretary of State for Overseas Departments and Territories, Mr. Olivier Stirn, on 26 August 1974, as well as the significant remarks of Pr~sident VaIer)' Gisc;m'l d'Estaing on 24 October 1974. I shaIl~ therefor~. not labour these points except to stress that there was no doubt in anybody's mind-not in the m1r.d of the United Nations, and certai..'lly not in the mind of the Government of France-that the global referendum which was held in the Comoros in December 1974 was to pave the way for an independent and united Commos. And that is why, despite the last-minute ch8nge of posltion by the Government of France in an attempt to rationalize its colonial presence in Mayotte, the United Nations, in admitting the Comeros as a full-fledged Member of our Organization on 12 November 1975, specifically defmed the Comoros to include all the four islands, including MayC' ~fe. France's occupation of the Comorian island of Mayotte h:o therefore, in violati0~ of international law and in contravention of its own solemn undertakings as the administering Power; it is beyond any moral justification. 52. Judging by the history of this question, it would, I submit, be more understandable, though still clearly unacceptable, if the Government of France, through it~ eminent spokesmen bOL!l at home and abroad, spoke frankly of its own legislative limitations rather than attempted to rationalize a situation which defies any logic or consistency. 53. So much for the historical review of this question. This Assembly is once again considering the issue due primarily to the lack of response by the French Goverr- ment to the appeals and demands of our Organization as clearly affirmed during the thirty-first session. It is, indeed, a matter of profound regret to my delegation and to my Government that the French Government has continued to frustrate the aspirations of the Comorian nation and to ignore the collective overwhelming will of the international community. We particularly regret the fact that all efforts made by the OAU, 11.cluding those recently undertaken on behalf of the OAU by no less a personality than our own Chairman, El Hadj Omai ii01~O, the President of Gabon; have not been met with the desired positive response from the Government of France. This state of affairs is most lamentable. It should now be clear to the French author- ities that, a,; long as the question of Mayotte remains unresolved and as long as they continue to occupy that island, the relations between that country and free Africa will continue to be in a state of uneasiness, bordering at times on a confrontation course. 54. The Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Comoros, our brother Mouzawar AbdaIlah, has in his intervention of yesterday [53rd meeting! eloquently and dispassionately put forward the detailed struggle of his young nation to 55. The Tanzanian de1egation has found it necessary to take part hi the current debate in order to stress the responsibility of our Organization to do everything in its power to assist the Gcvernment and people of the Comoros in their hour of need, for we are all aware of the tremendous burden imposed on that State as a result of the series of unjustifiable measures taken against it by France. We are also aware ofsome of the problems arising from the natural disaster that has befallen it. More than ever before, the Comoros need the moral, political and, above all, the practical assistance of the world community so that it can consolidate its newly won freedom and forge ahead in its legitimate struggle for the liberation of the island of Mayotte arid thus safeguard the unity and territorial integrity of its State. 56. Tanz~nia wishes also to reiterate once again its solemn call to the Government of France to reconsider its present untenable and, indeed, I venture to suggest, misguided policy towards the question of Mayotte. We urge it to adopt a policy and pursue actions which are consonant with the laudable remarks made by no less a personality than its own Head of State two years ago. By putting an end to its occupation of Mayotte and thus respecting the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros, the French Govern- ment wnI be acting not only in accordance with its original solemn obligations as the administering Power but it will also at the same time be eliminating a source of constant friction with free Africa and restoring its own credibility in the international community. We urge that Government to pursue a path of reason and justice especially for the people ,f the Comoros. Without being presumptuous I submit that such a policy can OIily be in the best long-term interests of France. 57. Finally, it is the clear responsibility of the United Nations to take those action$ and, adopt those measures calculated to give specific support to the Government and people of the Comoros in attaining their legitimate aspira- tions for the liberation of Mayotte and for the preservation of the unity and territorial integrity of their country. It is in this spirit that Tanzania is privileged to be a sponsor of draft resolution A/32/L.12 and Add.! and 2 before this Assembly, so eloquently introduced this aftcrnoo!! by our good friend, Ambassador Hamilton Shirley Amerasinghe of Sri Lanka. It is our hope and belief that this Assembly will give an overwhelming endorsement to that draft resolution and that the Government 0: France will respond in a ~ositi'!e manner.

For two consecutive years we have, through this body, been pleading with France to eliminate the contradictions created by the incomplet~ decolonization of the Comoros-a sovereign Member State of this Organization and a sovereign member of the OAU. Likewise, for two consecutive years, the occupation of the Comorian Island of Mayotte by France continues to be a lamentably unsolved matter. 60. This victory of the people of the Comoros was very much welcomed by my people, largely because it was in harmony with an aspiration for which we ourselves had fought for 10 long years against Portuguese colonialism: to regain our freedom and independence. One thing, however, makes our happiness incomplete and causes us not to feel totally at ease with the decolorJzation of the Comoros. The exclusion of the island of Mayotte from a whole whose unity had on many occasions been confrrmed by the French authorities themselves during the colonial period is a matter the justification for which we cannot understand. 61. Historical data about the Comoms proves that there is neither ethnic nor cultural differences between the inhab- itants of Mayotte and the three other Comorian islands. All of them constitute one and the same people, speaking the same language and having one common history. This was confIrmed by none other than President Giscard d'Estaing, as recently as 24 October 1974 at a press conference that has been quoted by many of the speakers who preceded me. Moreover, until the date of independence, France administered the four islands ~f the Comoros as one entity, and the referendum of 22 December 1974 was prepared by France on this global basis for all the Comorian population. 62. Such being the case, it was hoped that on attaining independence the four islands would continue to constitute an indivisible whole. But this did not happen. -On the contrary, the world was surprised by yet another colonialist manoeuvre which consisted of dividing one people and dismembering their national identity. 63. Mozambique cannot and will not ever accept this flagrant violation of the national integrity of the Comoros by France, and we are afraid that, if France does not work out a just a.qd equitable settlement of the problem of the Comorian island of Mayotte, the undesirable consequences may create another zone of tension in the world. 64. Notwithstanding the constitutional allegations that France makes, we in Mozambique are not very sure of the real reason and objective for which France is holding the island'of Mayotte. We suspect that for sinister ends France is creating a source of unrest and tension not only for the Comoros and the countries neighbOUring the Comoras but also for all of the Indian Ocean zone at a time when all the countries around that ocean are tryifig to keep the region a zone of peace. 65. At this point I believe it is relevant to repeat what my President, His Excellency Samora Moises Machel, said at this thirty-second session of the General Assembly on 3 October 1977: "The People's Republic of Mozambique condemns the illegal occupation of Mayotte ... which violates the right of an--peoples to self-determination enshrined in the United Nations Charter, and expresses its solidarity with the struggle of the Comorian . .. peoples and demands 67. The world, which is now exerting every effort to maintain international peace in order to devote more attention.' and effort to the solution of its numerous problems, does not want to see any more conflicts developing whether in the Comoros, the Indian Ocean, in southern Africa or anywhere else in the world for that matter. Therefore, my delegation hopes that France will reconsider its decision and accept the undeniable reality that the State of Comoros comprises the islands of Anjouan, Mayotte, Moheli and Grande-Comore and that no one can dismember one part of a State without violating its territorial integrity. 68. For the reasons I have just given, my delegation appeals to the French Government to enter into nego- tiations with the Comorian authorities with a view to fmding a just settlement for the problei!1 of the island of Mayotte as soon as possible, taking into consideration the political unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros as borne out by the relevant resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly on this issue.

The problem of the Comoros, with which we are dealing today, is an extremely important problem and is one of great significance in the history of the independence of peoples and the protection of their territorial integrity and sovereignty, both of which are fundamental principles embodied in the United Nations Charter, in international law and in the declarations adopted by our Organization concerning decolonization in all its forms. 70. Several countries which have recently attained independence, including countries of the African continent, have suffered from attempts to interfere with their rights and with their territorial integrity, causing those States to face many serious problems, which required considerable efforts to overcome. Consequ~nt1y, the reaction of the countries of the African continent has been fum and decisive: they have given their support to maintaining the territorial integrity of the Comoros and they are deter- mined that sovereignty shall be restored< to an integral part of that territory. 71. Thus, the efforts made by the countries of the African continent have been reflected in many resolutions adopted by various organizations-for example, by the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the OAU at its thirteenth ordinary session in Mauritius in 1976 and at its fourteenth ordinary session t held in Libreville in 1977. Those resolutions reafrrrm the unity and territorial integrity 72. Thus, the Committee of Seven of the OAU, a committee composed of the Foreign Ministers of seven Mrican States under the chairmanship of the President of Gabon, the current Chairman of the OAU, has been called upon to approach the French authorities and the other parties in order to find a solution to the problem and then to put that solution into effect. 73. The General Assembly at its thirtieth session adopted resolution 3385 (XXX),' which admitted the Comoros to membership in the United Nations. That resolution reaf- firmed the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros as an entity composed of the islands of Anjouan, Grande- Comore, Mayotte and Mohcm. That unity was also empha- sized in resolution 3291 (XXIX) and resolution 31/4, which reaffirmed the legitimate rights ofthe Comoros. 74. The attention given by Africa and the non-aligned group to this problem and the fact that the question is still on the agenda of the General Assembly are decisive proof of the interest which the international community takes in this problem. 75. The position of Egypt with respect to this problem is based on certain very important considerations. First, Egypt and the Comoro~ are members of the GAU and are committed to respect its position with regard to the problems of the continent. Egypt and the Comoros are also members of the non-aligned group and Egypt has a special interest in applying the principles of non-alignment. Secondly, the resolutions of the General Assembly, and in particular its most recent ones on this subject, namely, resolution 3291 (XXIX) of 13 December 1974, resolution 3385 (XXX) of 24 November 1975 and resolution 31'/4 of 21 October 1976, confirm the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros. Thirdly, Egypt, which is a Member of the United Nations, is committed to the principle of respect for the purposes of the United Nations Charter and, therefore, will contribufe, to the extent of its ability, to the settlement of international problems. Fourthly, the French authorities, before the accession of the Comoros to independence, proclaimed their intentinn to protect the territorial integrity ofthe Comoros. The statement made by the French President, Mr. Valery Giscard d'Estaing, on 24 October 1974, in particular, sets forth that intention. Fifthly, the links of friendship and co-operation between Egypt and France encourage us to react in a positive manner to the attempt to fmd for this problem a solution that is consistent with the aspirations and interests of all the parties concerned. 76. Yesterday the Foreign Minister of the Comoros described the problems of his country to the General Assembly and underlined -the political and peaceful ini- 77. Thanks to the French admfuistration, which acted properly in granting the pe9ple of the Comoro islands and the people qf the French Somali Coast the exercise of their right to self-determination, which resulted in those States achieving indepen(ience and joining our· international family, France is capable of responding to the will of the international community and of the OAU and of putting an end to this problem by restoring the island of Mayotte to the moth~rland. 78. Egypt is ready to contribute to all peaceful and positive efforts towards the attainment of that goal and the aspirations of the African continent for the total indepen- dence of all peoples, so that they may be able to settle their own problems and proceed with their development.

The United Nations has before it, once again, the question of the Comorian i'iland of Mayotte, which is a matter of concern to the inter- national community. If not resolved promptly within the framework of the principles of justice and equity, this question will no doubt constitute another serious source of international tension. 80. It was on 15 iune 1973 that the Joint Declaration on the Accession to Independence of the Comoro Archipel- ago,3 signed in Paris, recognized the .mvereignty and independence of the Comorian archipelago within a maxi- mum period of five years. However, on 10 October 1974, the French Government decided to hold a referendum in the four islands constituting the Comoro archipelago within six months from that date. It is certainly to France's credit that the French Government decided then to hold that referendum without waiting until the end of the five-year period announced in 1973. 81. On 13 December 1974, the United Nations General Assembly affirmed the unity md territorial integrity of the Comoros Archipelago in resolution 3291 (XXIX), adopted by acclamation. That resolution was adopted within a month of the French Government's decision to hold a global referendum. On 22 December 1974, a global referendum held in the four islands of the Comoros showed ~ that an overwhelming majority, 95.5 per cent of the Comorian people, voted in favour of independence. 82. Subsequently, the Government of the Comoros declared its independence in July 1975 and applied for membership in the United Nations. On the recommen- dation of the Security Council, the General Assembly in 3 Ibid., Twenty-e(r;hth Session, Supplement No. 23, chap. XI, annex, appendix TI. 83. On the other hand, while the result of the voting by the Comorian population as a whole showed that the overwhelming majority was in favour of independence, as far as the island of Mayotte was concerned, the majority of that island voted against independence. France, on the basis of only this aspect of the matter, took measures in December 1975 to accept the independence of the three islands of Gninde-Comore, Anjouan and Mohtm, excluding the island of Mayotte. It decided to let the people of the isla.nd of Mayotte determine, through a new separate referendum, whether they would join the Comoros or remain with France. The Government of the Comoros rightfully opposed the position of France because it considered that the four islands constituted an integral entity, as endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolution 3385 (XXX) ofNovember 1975, which admitted the ComofOs to membeThhip in the United Nations. 84. In the meantime, negotiations were held between the Comoros and France, but they unfortunately failed to produce agreement. On 6 February 1976, on the eve of the second referendum to be held in the island of Mayotte, the Security Council was seized of the matter4 and .voted on a draft resolutionS which considered the second referendum conducted by France in Mayotte an interference in the internal affairs of the Comoros and called on France to desist from proceeding with this referendum. France opposed that draft resolution. The referendum of February took place, followed by another in April, in contravention of United Nations General Assembly resolution 3385 (XXX), which had admitted the Comoros to United Nations membership as an integral unit. Since then the Government of France has taken the position that the issue of Mayotte was an internal matter, without, however, excluding the possibility of an accession by Mayotte to the Comoros if the people of that island so desired at a-future date. 85. That development, which is inconsistent with treating the Comoro archipelago as a territorial whole in terms of General Assembly resolution 3385 (XXX), has caused disappointment and concern in I the international com- munity. In fact, since that time the issue has been taken up on sev~ral previous occasions at conferences' of the non- aligned countries, of the OAU and of the League of Arab States, and at the Seventh Islamic Conference of Istanbul, as well as the most recent Eighth Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers, held in Tripoli in May 1977. Those Conferences adopted resolutions calling for a just and equitable solution to the matter on the basis of the unity 87. In this connexion my delegation welcomes the con- structive attitude assumed by the Government of the Comoros and its readiness for negotiations. It is the sincere hope and wish of my delegation that the parties concerned will soon succeed in working out a just and equitable settlement of the issue which will respect the political unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros in compliance with the principles of the Charter and the relevant United Nations resolutions. 88. It is in the light of these views that my delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/32/L.12 and Add.1 and 2.

The question of the Comorian island of Mayotte now under discussion would not have arisen had France conducted the process of decolonization in accordance with the principles of the Charter and the resolutions of the General Assembly, particularly para- graph 6 of resolution 1514 (XV). France, as the colonial Power, failed to complete the process of decolonizing the then colonial Territory of the Comoro archipelago. 90. The Comorian people, like any other former colonial people, struggled for its right to self-determination and independence. France, under the pressure of the struggle, agreed to organize a referendum covering the entire Territory which it administered as the Comoro archipelago. The Territory subject to the referendum included the Grande-Comore, Mayotte, Anjouan and Moheli. The results of the referendum of 22 December 1974 expressed by an overwhelming majority the will of the people to accede to independence in political unity and territorial integrity. However, the results of the referendum did not please France because they did not fall in line with what France had imagined or intended for the Comoro archipelago. France failed to comply with the will of the people as expressed in the referendum of 22 December 1974 and proceeded to exploit the differences within a people which are bound to exist in any community. After the Comoros declared its independence, France, breaking its past under- taking, seized the opportunity and occupied the island of Mayotte by force of arms. 91. One need not labour the issue at this stage because the facts of the case are clear. France acted in complete disrespect of the will of the people of the Comoros as a whole and in utter violation of the United Nations Charter and spe~ific resolutions of the General Assembly. France dismembered th~ ComOIos and still continues illegall} to occupy the island of Mayotte. :Yhatever meas- ures France has taken in the island of Mayotte since the declaration of independence by the Comoros are illegal and 92. My delegation would like to reite:!"ate its position in this regard, that the occupation of the island of Mayotte by France, on whatever pretext, is deplorable and is an act of flagrant aggression against the people and the territory ofa State Member of the United Nations. We call upon France to pull 'out of Mayotte immediately, thus enabling the people of Mayotte to participate in the affairs of their country, the Republic of Comoros. The exploitation of the divisive wishes of a minority section of the people is no good excuse for the continued occupation of the Comorian territory of Mayotte.

The Assembly will now hear those representatives who wish to explain their vote before the vote is taken. In this connexion, I should like to remind the Assembly that under rule 88 of the rules of procedure: "The President shall not permit the proposer of a proposal or of an amendment to explain his vote on his own proposal or amendment."

My delegation has followed closely the debate which was concluded today. I have the feeling that on the whole those who have spoken from this rostrum have done so in order to give the niethod of dialogue a chance. I have noted in particular that several speakers commended the way in which my country led to independence the Territories that history had entrusted to it. They may be sure that it is in the same spirit, gUided by the concern to respect the will of peoples, that France has acted in the mutter before us today. But we ·have also heard statements which bear no relation to reality. That I deplore. It has been said that France has been doing nothing to bring the question of Mayotte to a solution. May I recall that a law of 24 December 1976 conferred an evolving status on the islands and that the people of Mayotte will be able to decide freely on their future without any solution being rejected a priori and without my country trying to influence their choice in any way. 95. For us there can be no solution to the question of Mayotte other than an equitable one. No one here can claim today to know what that solution is. It will be the solution which the people of Mayotte freely choose themselves when the time comes. This solution will have to be a sincere and sensible one. France can understand that the Comorians should wish, in a loyal and brotherly dialogue, to convince the people of Mayotte to rejoin them. It is ready to act to restore between Mayotte and the Comoros a co-operation which, I would recall, was not broken up by the action of France. It is also convinced that the choice of the people of Mayotte will depend to a large extent on the attitude taken by the Comorian Government and people towards them. Therefore, let these vain polem- ics cease. Let a true dialogue be established. Let the people of the Comoros and of Mayotte go beyond their differences and take account of what binds them together. Then, I am convinced, they will find reasons for and ways of living in harmony and with respect for each ohler's rights and wishes. 97. The text refers to resolutions that we have rejected. It seeks to determine in advance the formula which should result from the negotiations that it recommends. When it asserts that Mayotte is a part of the Republic of the Comoros it takes no account of the very principle of self-determination by arbitrarily denying to the people of Mayotte the right freely to choose their future. 98. I profoundly regret that the drafters of this text saw fit to base on mistaken premises a draft which is for that reason unacceptable to my country. In the circumstances my delegation will not take part in the vote.

My delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/32/L.12 on the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte, thus expressing our solidarity with the Govern- ment and people of the Comoros in their legitimate aspiration to preserve the territorial integrity and national unity of their country. Both those principles are of fundamental value in the process of decolonization. 100. It is obvious that the situation with which we are confronted now would not have existed if the fonner administering Power, France, had conducted the process of decolonization of that Territory in a manner consistent with the principles of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV). 101. In our view, -the issue which the Assembly is now considering constitutes a manifest violation of the national sovereignty of the Comoro islands, which in practice is tantamount to ignoring the many resolutions adopted by the General Assembly in which it recognized that the island of Mayotte was an integral part of Comorian territory. Similarly, the French occupation of the island of Mayotte contravenes the resolution adopted by this General Assem- hly and accepted by Franc;e, whereby the Comoros became a State Member of this Organization. 102. In other words, we are witnessing a situation where the territorial integrity and sovereignty of a State Member of the United Nations is being ignored by a permanent member of the Security Council, that is to say, a Power that has special responsibilities to uphold and defend the Charter of the Organization. 103. For those reasons, my delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution and we hope that it will receive the widest possible support in this Assembly. 104. Moreover, the draft resolution is generous in its nature and it provides France with the opportunity of fmding a harmonious and just solution of this problem. 105. We hope that when next year the Secretary-General reports 10 us on the results of the implementation of this resolution we shall see a more favourable reaction on the part of the former administering Power.

I shall now call on these represen- tatives who wish to explaiIl their vote after the vote.

The Netherlands delegation abstained in the vote on the draft resolutioH just adopted by the General Assembly. We did so because in our view the resolution is not fully balanced and does not sufficiently reflect the efforts undertaken by the French Government in the search for a solution to this difficult problem. 109. However, I should like to state that the Netherlands abstention does not affect my Government's view that colonial or non-independent territories should in principle 6 The delegations of Costa Rica and Lesotho .subsequently informed the Secretariat that they wished to have their votes recorded as having been in favour of the draft resolution. The meetingrose at 5.25 p.m.