A/34/PV.75 General Assembly

The General Assembly will resume consideration of the reports of the Fourth Com- mittee concerning seven of the agenda items assigned to it. Pursuant to rule 66 of the rules ofprocedure. it was decided not to discuss the reports of the Fourth Com- mittee.

The positions of delegations with respect to the recommendations contained in the reports of the Fourth Committee to the Assembly are reflected in the relevant summary records of the Com- mittee. 3. I would remind members of the decision taken by the General Assembly on 21 September 1979, as follows: " . . .when the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in the plenary Assembly, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, that is, either in the Committee or in the plenary Assembly, unless that delegation's vote in the plenary Assembly is different from its vote in the Committee." [4th meeting, para. 349.)

We shall turn first to the report of the Fourth Committee on agenda item 94 [A/34/ 673]. We shall now take a decision on the draft resolu- tion entitled "United Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa", recommended by the Committee in paragraph 9 of its report. The Fourth Committee adopted that draft resolution without objec- tion. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

The General Assembly will now consider the report of the Fourth Committee on agenda item 95 [A/34/670). The Assembly will now take adeci- sion on the draft resolution entitled "Offers by Member States of study and training facilities for inhabitants of Non-Self-Governing Territories", recommended by the Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. The Fourth Committee adopted that draft resolution without objec- tion. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We shall now take up the report of the Fourth Committee on agenda item 89 [A/34/ 667]. The Assembly will now vote on the draft resolu- tion entitled "Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories transmitted under Article 73 e of the Charter of the United Nations", recommended by the Fourth Committee in paragraph 10 of its report. A recorded vote has been requested.

The Assembly will now consider parts II and III of the report of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples relating to specific Ter- ritories not covered by other agenda items [A/34/638/ Add./ and 2]. 9. I shall npw call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes before the vote on any or all of the recommendations of the Fourth Committee in its report on this item. Representatives will also have an oppor- tunity to explain their votes after all the votes on this report have been taken.

I intend to make a statement on behalf of the Soviet delegation on one of the items on today's agenda. 11. During the consideration of the question of the Western Sahara in the Fourth Committee, the delega- tion of the Soviet Union voted in favour of the draft resolution now submitted for approval by the General Assembly and contained in the report of the Committee [see A/34/638/Add./, para. 34]. The Soviet delegation intends to support that draft resolution in the present vote also. In voting in favour of that draft resolution, the delegation of the USSR once again wishes to em- phasize that in this case it is proceeding on the basis of the position of principle of the Soviet Union regarding the right of the people of Western Sahara to self- determination. This position is determined by the con- stant striving of the Soviet Union to ensure the right of all peoples to decide their own fate independently and without any outside interference. We are firmly con- vinced that, with such an approach, the solution to this problem can and indeed must be obtained by peaceful political means, taking into account the interests of all the countries involved in the conflict and the aim of en- suring lasting peace and security in the area of north- west Africa in accordance with the principles and the decisions of the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity lOA U]. 12. As is wen known to all, the United Nations and OAU have adopted a whole series of useful and impor- tant decisions on Western Sahara which were designed to resolve the existing problem, and the need to imple- ment them is obvious. It is the profound conviction of the Soviet Union that all the problems arising in this connexion must be resolved by peaceful means, because 13. It is very important, in this connexion, for all the parties involved to refrain from any action that might complicate and exacerbate the situation in that region; they should in fact attempt to resolve the situation by peaceful means, by means of negotiation. 14. The Soviet Union is a constant champion of the idea that the Western Sahara problem should be re- solved in precisely that way. In speaking of this, we wish once again to emphasize especially the inadmissibility of any interference, especially militaryinterference, by ex- ternal forces in current events as far as a settlement of the Western Sahara situation is concerned. 15. In conclusion, I should like to say that the Soviet Union has supported and intends in future to support good relations of friendship with all the States of the Maghreb on the basis of the principles of equality of rights, respect for sovereignty, peaceful coexistence, mutual benefit and non-interference in internal affairs.

The Assembly will now pro- ceed to take decisions on the various recommendations of the Fourth Committee. We turn first to the draft resolutions recommended by the Committee in paragraph 34 of its report [A/34/638/Add./]. 17. Draft resolution I deals with the question of Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Montserrat and Turks and Caicos Islands. The Fourth Committee adopted draft resolution I without objec- tion. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft resolution II is entitled "Question of American Samoa". The Fourth Commit- tee adopted draft resolution II without objection. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft resolution III is entitled "Question of the United States Virgin Islands".The Fourth Committee adopted draft resolution III without objection. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft resolution IV is entitled "Question of Western Sahara". A recorded vote has been requested. 21.. The PRESIDENT: Draft resolution V is entitled "Question of Belize". A recorded vote has been re- quested.

I now invite. representatives to turn to the draft consensuses recommended by the Fourth Committee in paragraph 35 of its report [A/34/6311/Add. I]. 23. Draft consensus I deals with the question of the Cocos (Keeling) Islands. The Committee adopted draft consensus I without objection. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft consensus II relates to the question of Tokelau. The Fourth Committee adopted draft consensus II without objection. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? .. Draft consensusII wasadopted (decision 34/410).

Draft consensus III relates to the question of St. Helena. The Fourth Committee adopted draft consensus III without objection. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft consensus IV relates to the question of Gibraltar. The Fourth Committee adopted draft consensus IV without objection. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft consensusIV wasadopted (decision 34/412).

We now come to the draft deci- sions recommended by the Fourth Committee in paragraph 36 of its report [A/34/638/Add. I] 28. Draft decision I is entitled "Question of Brunei". The Committee adopted draft decision I without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft decision II is entitled 4 The delegation of i,.a Leone subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wished to have its vote recorded as having been in favour of the draft resolution.

Draft decision III is entitled "Question of Pitcairn". The Fourth Committee adopted draft decision III without a vote. May I con- sider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft decision IV relates to the question of Antigua and St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla. The Fourth Committee adopted draft decision IV without a vote. I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly also to adopt it.

I now invite members to turn their attention to the recommendation of the Fourth Committee in paragraph (j of its report (Part III) [A/34/638/Add.2]. The draft resolution recommended by the Committee, which is entitled "Question of Guam", was adopted in the Committee without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise'!

I now call on the represen- tatives who wish to explain their vote after the vote.

The General Assembly has considered the question of Belize, which was discussed in the Fourth Committee. The Committee finally adopted draft resolution A/C.4/34/L.14 submitted by Angola, the United Kingdom and other countries. That resolution reiterates similar texts submitted on past oc- casions by the same countries but which have had no result and have only made more difficult the settlement of the problem of Belize. That is why Guatemala has re- jected the draft resolution just adopted, as it has done in the past, by voting against it in the Fourth Committee and not participating in the vote in the plenary meeting. 35. We described in the Fourth Committee, and we reiterate in the plenary Assembly, the situation concern- ing the question of Belize in all its aspects, and the state of the direct negotiations held, between the United Kingdom and Guatemala in order to arrive at a just, equitable and honourable solution acceptable to all par- ties and taking into account the vital interests of the people of Belize, in accordance with the spirit and the letter of General Assembly resoiution 1514 (XV). That resolution is the constituent instrument of decoloniza- tion and has led to the greatest achievement of the United Nations, as is clear from the expansion of the membership of our Organization by the admission of so many new nations bringing with them the benefits of their culture, language, traditions and spirit of human solidarity and understanding. 36. Among the yet unresolved issuesin the decoloniza- tion process is the question of Belize, and this is because 37. As a result of the illegal occupation of Belize, Guatemala has had a continuing territorial dispute with England and has consistently pursued its goal of reaching a peaceful settlement of this legal dispute through the procedures established in international law and embodied in the Charter of the United Nations. 38. There has been mutual recognition by the parties that the case of Belizeis different from those that have followed the usual channels of decolonization, it being an occupied Territory and one that has been the subject of dispute. We have stressed that it is imperative to set- tle the legal dispute between the two parties to the con- flict before any decision to decolonize is taken, other- wise we should be creating a situation of constant incongruity that would destroy the conditions of har- mony, friendship, co-operation and development for an entire region, which, for historical, geographical, social and economic reasons, has been called upon to fulfil a basic mission in order to promote the harmonious destiny of our countries. 39. That is why, in the statement we made in the Fourth Committee, we praised the wisdom with which the Special Committee acted this year in postponing consideration of the question of Belizeuntil its next ses- sion, in the light of the Secretariat working paper [A/34/23/Rev. I, chap. XX/X, annex] on development in the Territory and the reported direct negotiations be- tween the parties, with the participation of the Govern- ment of Belize, aimed at settling the legal dispute. The Secretariat report highlights some noteworthy facts. 40. First of all, on 2 June 1978, the then Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, Mr. David Owen, the Prime Minister of Belize, Mr. George Price, and the leader of the op- position, Mr. Dean Lindo, signed a memorandum in which they declared that the Government and the op- position party of Belize " ... have agreed to put the issue of the Anglo- Guatemalan dispute above party politics and to treat the search for a solution as a national objective". They agreed " ... that a solution to the Anglo- Guatemalan dispute is highly desirable for progress to be made towards the independence of Belize" [ibid, para. 8]. 41. Secondly, the opposition party in Belize, which tends to be the majority party, has asked for a moratorium on independence and has publicly implied that it is necessary to hold a referendum before in- dependence. Guatemala has taken the same position over recent years; hence we believe it to be a positive sign that there is a convergence of views on the situation in Belize. 42. Moreover, as the United Kingdom declared in December 1.978: ~n. More recently, on 16 July 1979, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, Lord Carrington, stated: "Her Majesty's Government will continue to seek a negotiated settlement. ... It is known that elections will be held in Belize in the near future. After those elections we may well have a better idea as to what the situation is. . . .It is unlikely that any substan- tive discussion could be held in the negotiations until after the elections in Belize." Those elections are taking place this very day. 44. Contacts have been established here in New York between Mr. Nicholas Ridley, of the Foreign Office, and Mr. Rafael Castillo-Valdes, Minister for External Relations of Guatemala, as a result of which both have undertaken to renew direct negotiations on Belize as soon as circumstances permit. 45. It is obvious from the foregoing that the problem of Belize must be settled by peaceful means and that any negotiated settlement of this problem will have to refer to the legal nature of the controversy or dispute, which is territorial, not one of self-determination. According- ly, we agree with the joint statement of 2 June 1978, from which I have quoted, that the Anglo-Guatemalan dispute and the independence of Belize are two different matters, but with the reservation that the former must be settled before independence. 46. Any negotiated settlement in these circumstances will be ratified by the people of Guatemala in faithful observance of Article 1 of Title X, Transitional and Final Provisions of our Constitution, which provides: "Belize is declared to be a part of the territory of Guatemala. The executive must undertake all steps that would tend to settle its position in accordance with the national interests ... ". 47. On the basis of that constitutional precept, the Ex- ecutive Branch has sought a just settlement which, while defending the interests of the nation, w;'l promote the best interests of the people of Belize. Thus

I hate to interrupt the represen- tative of Guatemala, but his 10 minutes are up, so I would earnestly request him to conclude.

On assuming the office of President of the Republic, General Romeo Lucas Garcia declared before the Congress of the Republic: "We shall not fail in the defence of our legitimate ter- ritorial rights, especially as far as Belize is concerned; just as we shall be firm in our claims, so shall we take a civilized attitude towards the attainment of a peaceful, negotiated settlement, by taking into ac- count the interests of the people of Belize and 50. The delegation of Guatemala. submitted to the Fourth Committee draft amendments [A/C.4/34/L.J5) to the draft resolution. As these amendments were not adopted, our delegation voted against the draft resolu- tion and rejected it. 51. In view of all that I have said, the delegation of Guatemala reiterates the position it has taken in past years, of rejecting the resolution recommended by the Fourth Committee and contained in its report. Thus, my delegation did not participate in the vote in this meeting of the General Assembly.

Before calling on the next speaker, I should like to remind the Assembly of the decision which it took in its wisdom that" statements in explanation of vote should be limited to 10 minutes. It is very uncomfortable for the President to have to inter- rupt any representative, but, as I am obliged to apply the rules, I have no alternative but to do so. I therefore urge all subsequent speakers to ensure that their statements will be confined to the lO-minute limit.

The position of my delegation on the substance of the issue of Western Sahara has already been expounded during the debate in the Fourth Committee. 6 54. Our positive vote on the resolution just adopted is a reaffirmation of our consistent support for the posi- tion adopted by OAU, to which the parties concerned had referred the matter. It is also an expression of our hope that the matter will be settled in a peaceful manner through negotiations among all concerned and without outside interference.

With regard to the draft resolution on Guam, my delegation has joined in the consensus which has emerged, convinced that the general principles con- tained in it can help the people of that Territory freely to exercise their right to self-determination. 56. However, my delegation wishes to note its very serious reservations with regard to operative paragraph 10 of the draft resolution, which refers to the presence of military bases, something that is contrary to our prin- ciples of non-alignment. 57. Mr. R. RAHMAN (Bangladesh): My delegation decided to vote in favour of draft resolution IV after very careful consideration, because of our belief that the main substance of the draft conforms with the spidt of decisions adopted by the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of OAU after due inquiry, and by the Sixth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, and in due deference to these important decisions. 58. We should like, however, strongly to emphasize that there are elements in the draft resolution which are 6 Ibid., Thirty-fourth Session, Fourth Committee, 15th meeting, para. 38, and ibid., Fourth Committee, Sessional Fascicle, corrigen- dum.

My delegation voted in favour of draft resolution IV on the question of Western Sahara. In deference to your wise decision, Mr. President, I shall not repeat what I said in explana- tion of our affirmative vote in the Fourth Committee. My words were basically an appeal to all the parties to the conflict to seek a negotiated solution. 60. I am, however, under instructions to draw the at- tention of the Assembly to that explanation of vote, which I am sure will be adequately reflected in the sum- mary records of the Fourth Committee. 7 ,0 61. Mr. NUSEIBEH (Jordan): In explaining Jordan's abstention in the vote on draft resolution IV, I have decided to put aside diplomacy and politics and to speak from my heart: I have not prepared any written text. 62. This is one of the most agonizing and tantalizing issues facing my Government and afflicting my con- science. As a child and in adulthood, I was brought up to believe, on the basis of the undertakings of all the leaders of our brethren, the countries of the Arab Maghreb, that their aim after liberation-a liberation for which they sacrificed so much: Algeria sacrificed 1 million lives, and Morocco also sacrificed in great measure-would be the unity of the Arab Maghreb. Now we are placed in the United Nations in the position of having to take sides between members of our own family. If it could have served a useful purpose, I would certainly have taken a more positive position one way or the other, but the fact is that my Government and I feel terribly concerned that what is going on in the sisterly countries and areas of the Arab Maghreb might inten- sify and accelerate into a full-fledged war. 63. Can members imagine the toil, the hard work and the billions of dollars that the inhabitants of our two sisterly countries have squandered over the past decade in a futile struggle? It is my considered opinion, and my Government instructs me so to state, that the way to deal with the problem is not to aggravate the situation by taking sides, regardless of our cwn personal opin- ions. The question is properly the domain of the League of Arab States, where the leaders of the three concerned parties should meet together and agree on a formula which would, of course, endc -se and accept the princi- ple of self-determination which we support. Somehow a functional arrangement can be worked out whereby the three countries could work together for the promotion and integration of their programmes for economic, social and other kinds of advancement. 7 lbid., Fourth Commiuee, 23rdmeeting, para.8S, and ibid.• Fourth Committee, Sessional Fascicle, corrigendum. 65. It is against the conscience of the Jordanian peo- ple, of the entire Arab world-it is against my own con- science to have to face the situation of having to take the side of one country against another. 66. The Arab Maghreb should be united. It might be thought that that is a Utopian dream or that I am living 30 years in the past. That is not the case: it is the way of the future. It is for that reason, not lack of concern or indifference, but precisely because we are very pro- foundly concerned, right to the core of our heart, mind and conscience, that we should like to resort to other measures- an emergency meeting of the heads of State of the League of Arab States, an emergency meeting of OAU, an emergency meeting organized by the Secre- tary-General- toresolve the problem, because the alter- native could be a devastating WfU in which perhaps hun- dreds of thousands would pensh and in which the toil and sweat of 40 million of our brethren in Algeria and Morocco expended since they achieved their in- dependence and freedom would be wasted. 67. I know that there is an Arabic proverb which says that no mediator is ever destined to get into heaven, and that I am pleasing either one side or the other. At the same time I must emphasize our support for the princi- ple and right of self-determination. This could actually be achieved within a functional framework of co- operation and direct talks among the leaders of our dear brethren whose struggle to bring about the peaceful set- tlement of this conflict we have followed with admira- tion. 68. It is in order to avoid aggravating the situation and leaving the path of diplomacy that we have decided, with great regret, to take the position represented by our abstention in the vote. 69. Mr. de PINIES (Spain) (interpretation from Spanish): During the debate in the Fourth Committee perhaps some of the views expressed by the Spanish delegation were not made sufficiently dear. For that reason I should like to make some brief observations now that will not take more than three or four minutes. 70. As it did in the Fourth Committee, Spain abstain- ed in the vote at this meeting on draft resolution IV on Western Sahara, because it considered that the draft dif- fered in some important points from the position that it has been constantly upholding on this problem. 71. More specifically, the Spanish Government does not believe that the description given in operative paragraphs 5 and 6 of the presence in the Territory of one of the parties to the conflict is appropriate. That qualification goes beyond the terms of the decision on Western Sahara which was adopted by the Conference of Heads of State and Government of OAU at its six- teenth session [see A/34/552, pp. 95 and 96J, and, more specifically, the preambular paragraph in the decision in 72. Moreover, the Spanish Government considers that the decision adopted at the OAU Conference provides an adequate framework within which in the subsequent evolution of the situation a final, just and peaceful solu- tion of the problem may be found. To modify its terms by introducing elements that will prejudge the develop- ment, at this time when we are awaiting a new further meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee, will not help facilitate a solution of the problem. 73. Spain's position, which coincides with the recom- mendation of the OAU and past relevant General Assembly resolutions, is based on respect for the right of the Saharan people to self-determination. While awaiting the expression of will that will lead to the finalization of the Territory's decolonizationprocess, the Spanish Government believes it necessary that all those concerned, including the Saharan people, should participate in establishing a climate for dialogue that will make it possible for a solution to be found. Therefore, in this connexion it considers that the posi- tion of the Frente POLISARI08 is a reality that, along with other existing factors, must be taken into account in order to get a true expression of the will of the Saharan people.

In connexion with the question of Belize, the delegation of Ecuador voted in favour of the draft resolution because it recognizes the principle of self- determination of peoples without prejudice to its tradi- tional position of respecting the principle of uti possidetis juris. 7S. In adopting and supporting for several years now the position of the brother country of Guatemala, we are in favour of negotiations that will lead to the peaceful solution for which the Governments of Guatemala and the United Kingdom have been work- ing. In addition, we are thereby recognizing the legitimate rights of the parties concerned and the need for a United Nations resolution that will contribute to the establishment of peace in the continent and to the settlement of the outstanding questions that prevent co- operation for the over-all development of Latin American countries.

My delegation has voted in favour of the resolution on the question of Western Sahara. Our support of the resolution is a reaf- firmation of our commitment to the principle of the in- alienable right of peoples to self-determination. 77. However, my delegation wishes to dissociate itself from all those references in the draft resolution which imply condemnation of Morocco, particularly in opera- tive paragraph 5. In our opinion, the use of such strong language is not conducive to an amicable settlement of the question. 78. Pakistan is deeply concerned by this question, which is causing a strain in the relations among the 8 Frente Popular para la Liberacion de Saguia el-Hamra y de Rio de Oro.

The General Assembly will consider next the report of the Fourth Committee on agenda item 91 [A/34/668]. The Assembly will now t~ke a decisio.n on the draft resolution entitled "Ques- tion of East TImor", recommended by the Committee in paragraph 12of its report. A recorded vote has been re- quested. 80. The ~RESIDENT: I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes.

My delegation had occasion to explain its considered views on the question of East Timor in the course of the debate on this question in the Fo~rth.Committee. I wish, however, to take this oppor- tunity m the plenary Assembly to record the position of my Government on the matter. . 82. The factual situation relating to the decolonization of East Timor is there for all to see. The withdrawal of the colonial Power was followed by a decision of the people of East Timor on their future existence. This ex- ercise of self-determination was completed in July 1976, 83. We are firmly of the view that the serious efforts being made by the Indonesian Government to re- habilitate the economy of East Timor through resettle- ment and other programmes deserve the support of all countries and that the constant raising of polemical clouds serves no useful purpose. 84. For that reason my delegation voted against the present draft resolution on East Timor.

With regard to the draft resolution just adopted, my delegation-as it has done in previous years in connexion with similar draft resolutions-rejects it categorically and totally, since it does not serve any useful purpose and only constitutes unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of the sovereign State of Indonesia. 86. As is well known, the process of the decoloniza- tion of East Timor was completed on 17 July 1976, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and those of General Assembly resolu- tions 1514(XV) and 1541 (XV), when the people of that Territory exercised their right to self-determination by opting for independence through integration with Indonesia in a free and democratic manner. The United Nations was fully informed of the events and was even requested to involve itself in the process of the decolonization of the Territory. Unfortunately - for whatever reasons - there was no positive response. By attempting to involve the United Nations in the com- pleted process of decolonization, the resolution totally distorts the prevailing realities and denies the wishes of the people. The decision of the people of East Timor for integration with Indonesia is final and irrevocable. 87. The paragraphs containing references to the need for humanitarian aid are completely incorrect and biased. The relief efforts undertaken by my Govern- ment in the humanitarian area were spelled out at great length in our statement at the 21st meeting of the Fourth Committee, on 31 October. Besides detailing the measures to alleviate the suffering of the people who had been forced by FRETILIN9 to flee to the mountains and who returned last year suffering from malnutrition and disease, we also stated that we welcomed any inter- national humanitarian assistance with the co-ordination of the Indonesian Government.

Papua New Guinea's vote against the draft resolution on East Timor should in no way indicate that we are com- promising our very strong stand on issues of decoloniza- tion and human rights. In this particular case, my Government is of the view that there is no need for anything further in the decolonization process in that Territory and that the reality of the situation is that East Timor is now an integral part of the Republic of Indonesia.

We turn now to the report of the Fourth Committee on agenda item 92 [A/34/699]. I 91. The Sri Lanka delegation firmly believes that by the depletive exploitation of natural resources, the con- tinued accumulation and repatriation of huge profits and the use of such profits for the enrichment of foreign settlers and the entrenchment of colonial domination and apartheid in the Territories under consideration, the foreign economic, financial and, other interests op- erating in these Territories constitute a major obstacle to political independence and to the enjoyment by the indigenous inhabitants of the Territories of their natural resources. These activities therefore impede the im- plementation of the Declaration contained in resolution 1514 (XV). Sri Lanka particularly condemns the col- laboration of foreign capital and technology with the South African regime in the nuclear arms field, with grave implications for regional and international peace and security. My delegation therefore supports the thrust and objectives of the draft resolution that is to be put to the vote. 92. However, we note in operative paragraphs 7, 8 and 14 that specific countries are named for condemnation. We would prefer it if that were not so, and we doubt the advisability of naming specific countries. The singling out of individual countries in the draft resolution may tend to prove counter-productive and dissipate some of the broad support which this draft resolution should ob- tain. Our view is that countries should be specifically named only as a last resort and when there appears to be no further room for negotiations with them towards the implementation of United Nations resolutions, such as resolution 1514 (XV). Condemnation by name may also involve the danger of these countries becoming immune to international public opinion. 93. Sri Lanka expressed those views when this item came up for consideration here last year, and also at the Sixth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, held in September at Havana. 94. Notwithstanding those explanatory comments which my delegation has been constrained to make, we shall vote in favour of the draft resolution. 95. Miss ZONICLE (Bahamas): The Bahamas delega- tion has always supported and will continue whole- heartedly to support the implementation of any resolu- tion which aspires to eliminate obstacles that may prevent peoples under colonial domination from attaining in- dependence and territorial integrity. The draft resolu- tion recommended by the Fourth Committee is no ex- ception, and my delegation will therefore support it. However, my delegation wishes to state that, because of serious reservations it has with respect to the language and structure of operative paragraphs 7 and 8 of this draft resolution, if those two paragraphs were to be put to a separate vote my delegation would be constrained to vote against their inclusion in this otherwise impor- tan: draft resolution.

Liberia has always sup- ported, and will continue to support, the lofty principles 97. In this connexion, my delegation urges that in future certain paragraphs of the resolution on activities of foreign economic and other interests should be refor- mulated, to ensure not only overwhelming support but implementation by all States. .

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution entitled "Activities of foreign economic and other interests which are im- peding the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in Southern Rhodesia, Namibia and in all other Territories under colonial domination and efforts to eliminate colonialism, apartheid and racial discrimina- tion in Southern Africa", recommended by the Fourth Committee in paragraph 10 of its report on agenda item 92 [A/34/699]. A recorded vote has been requested. 99. The' PRESIDENT: I shall now call upon those 101. Without prejudice to that, however, we should like to enter a reservation concerning some of the inac- curacies in operative paragraph 7. In that paragraph, those countries that maintain diplomatic and other rela- tions with South Africa are condemned because, it is said, that is "in violation of the relevant resolutions of the United Nations". Now, as is obvious, only those resolutions that are obligatory and mandatory can be violated, and the only organ with authority to adopt mandatory resolutions is the Security Council, which in respect of South Africa has adopted a single resolution that is binding upon Member States. I am speaking of Security Council resolution 418 (1977), which concerns military co-operation with Pretoria. Thus it cannot be said that those countries that maintain diplomatic rela- tions with South Africa are violating relevant resolu- tions of the United Nations. We believe that that is erroneous and that it does not accord with a proper in- terpretation of the Charter. 102. It is not accidental that diplomatic relations are not prohibited. As we have stated on past occasions the maintenance of diplomatic relations with a State' has nothing to do with support for its policies. As is known countries with the most disparate and even diametrically opposed policies maintain diplomatic relations, and no one would conclude from that that they are lending sup- port to a given policy. There is a marked difference be- tween maintaining relations with a State and col- laborating ~ith it. Th~t. difference, has been, clearly recognized m past decisions on this agenda Item in which, very wisely, what was condemned was collabora- tion - in other words, special relations with South Africa - and not the mere existence of relations in the sense given to that term by international law. It is very unfortunate that this year this incorrect approach should have been adopted. 103. My country has stated in the past, and we reaf- firm today, that we support additional measures by the Security Council in the efforts of the international com- munity to combat apartheid. Those measures are in- dicated in General Assembly resolutions that have received Argentina's support. Consequently we should like to repeat that if the Security Council, which is the supreme authority responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, were to adopt new resolutions in this field pursuant to the recommenda- tions of the General Assembly, those resolutions, which would be mandatory, would be faithfully complied with by Argentina, which is a country that has scrupulously respected the provisions of the Charter and all interna- tional commitments to which it is a party. 104. In conclusion we should like to add that we find ourselves compelled to enter a reservation concerning the mention of countries within the body of a resolu- tion. This is consistent with the position we have taken on past occasions in connexion with similar situations. 106. We wish to reaffirm. our solidarity with all the peoples fighting for their liberation. Their struggle is our struggle. We consider that as long as peoples con- tinue to languish under foreign domination our own liberation is not complete. We are fundamentally against the plundering of the riches of peoples that are still under domination and the splitting up of their ter- ritories for selfish purposes. We continue to abhor apartheid, and we condemn the racist minorities that are throttling the black majorities of Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa. Our support for the liberation movements remains firm. 107. However, we were obliged to abstain in the vote on the draft resolution that has just been adopted because of its operative paragraphs 7 and 8, concerning condemnation of collaboration with South Africa, which discriminate in a way that seems to us unjust and dangerous. We are all aware that the list of countries which supply the South African economy in one way or another is a long one. Why then is that list only partly taken into consideration here? 108. This discrimination is harmful because in ex- clusively focusing the attention of the international community on some countries, we enable others to develop, quietly, effectively and under cover, in col- laboration with the racist regimes that we are struggling against, economic and other relations which give new life to those regimes and strengthen them in their con- temptible policy. This in our opinion is not the best way to eliminate the barriers to the liberation of peoples under foreign domination.

The delegation of Peru voted in favour of the draft resolution contained in paragraph 10of document, A/34/699 because it reaffirms the inalienable right of peoples to self-determination, independence and the full use of their natural resources and because it condemns foreign economic and other interests in colonial ter- ritories, which constitute an obstacle to the application of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. 110. Nevertheless, once again my delegation wishes to express its disagreement with the contents of certain paragraphs in the resolution that we have just adopted. We would have abstained had a separate vote been taken on those paragraphs on account of the fact that, besides using terms that we do not believe appropriate, they also contain references to certain countries which, in our view, may be discriminatory, which does not fur- ther the true interests that we should promote. Ill. Mr. DLAMINI (Swaziland): My delegation would like to express its concern about the effect of the resolution on those people who are still under colonial domination. It is true that activities of foreign economic and other interests playa major role in impeding the im- plementation of the granting of independence to such 112. When this body takes a decision to apply oil sanc- tions, Swaziland finds itself affected. Our present economic linkage was arranged by our former colonial masters. It is not easy for a small country with limited resources to disengage itself from its historical past without help from the international community. Our ef- forts have been set back by the high oil prices. The energy crisis has affected our economic development a great deal. We therefore sincerely feel that decisions taken here should take into account our sensitive and special position.

The General Assembly will now consider the report of the Fourth Committee on agenda items 93 and 12 [A/34/669]. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution entitled "Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the United Nations" recommended by the Fourth Committee in paragraph 9 of its report. A recorded vote has been requested.