A/37/PV.52 General Assembly

First, I should like to draw the attention of the members of the General Assembly to the report ofthe Fourth Committee [A/37/592]. Ifl hear no objection, I shall take it that the General Assembly takes note of that report. It was so decided (decision 37/404). 2. The PRESIDENT: Before calling on the first speaker, may I remind representatives that, in accordance with the decision taken at yesterday's plenary meeting, the list of speakers in the debate on this item will be closed at 12 noon today. 3. Mr. MUNOZ LEDO (Mexico)(interpretationjrom Spanish): I should like to extend to you, Mr. President, our best wishes for success in the discharge of your important functions. In so doing, I should like to repeat the well-deserved tribute paid to you here by the President of Mexico [l3th meetbzg] for your diplomatic qualities and to your country for the strength of its national values. 4. I had the honour to present here from the rostrum of the General Assembly the request for inclusion in the agenda of the thirty-seventh session of the item entitled "Question of the Malvinas Islands" [A/37/ 193], a request which was approved by consensus. I did so with the valuable support of20 Latin American delegations whose Governments had decided to act jointly to ensure that this age-long, grievous dispute would find a just and lasting solution. 5. We feel that over a century and a half of controversy, approximately two decades of bilateral negotiations and debates in the United Nations, as well as the recent armed conflict with its loss of human lives, material damage and confrontations between countries and regions, make it incumbent upon the international community to provide an adequate framework and an effective impetus for a peaceful settlement of this dispute. 6. In that request we reaffirmed that: "The persistence of this colonial situation in America and the dispute between the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom ofGreat Britain and Northern Ireland concerning sovereignty over the Islands ... have led to serious armed conflict in the South Atlantic and Gonstitute a situation that affects the Latin American region in particular". We asked the General Assembly to "urge the parties to the dispute to resume, under 28. Who could claim that the inhabitants of territorial, strategic and military enclaves of the great Powers who are citizens of those same great Powers can enjoy the right to self-determination in the territory ofanother State? Who could agree that the South Africans ofWalvis Bay and the adjacent islands should exercise self-determination and separate that area from the territory of Namibia, or that the British population ofGibraltar could set up the caricature of a new nation on Spanish territory? 29. We do not object to the application of the principle of self-determination to the Malvinas because of the size of the population of the Islands, as has been suggested; our objection is rather based on the lack of any valid right to settle those people there in the first place. We are here dealing with the subjects of an occupying Power who have been settled on foreign territory. To claim that they can acquire rights to such territory through the passage of time and legitimize such rights by their own decision would be tantamount to legitimizing the armed conquests and annexationist and expansionist policies that are, unfortunately, all too prevalent. 30. To claim, on the other hand, that the settlement of a population in a territory in itself establishes the right to self-determination for that population would set a very dangerous precedent, particularly in an era that is characterized by increasing migratory flows across borders, as a result of which millions of human beings are living outside their countries of origin and, in some instances, form very large communities. The 35. Faced with that trend, we, the majority of States, with a genuine vision of the future, are calling for the development of international society and of its principles, rights and institutions that represent one of the finest legacies of civilizati9n. The dispute over the Malvinas is deeply rooted in the past, but it also has tremendous significance for the future. Consequently we must act with the greatest possible political responsibility, setting aside untoward displays of triumph and defiance. 36. I would urge members of the Assembly to adopt without delay the draft resolution I am now introducing, one to which no just and truly modem conscience could object. 37. In the early days of this coming January, shortly after the conclusion of this session {If the General Assembly, it will be exactly 150 years,since the taking of the Malvinas Islands by force. Let us hope that the anniversary will mark the beginning of genuine 40. The General Assembly declared in resolution 1514 (XV) that: "Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nati.ons." 41. On the other hand, resolution 2065 (XX) on the question of the Malvinas Islands, adopted in 1965 without a single opposing vote, called on the United Kingdom and the Argentine Republic to resolve this dispute on sovereignty through direct negotiations. A year later, indeed, those negotiations began. 42. It appears that as far back as 1968, the text of an agreement was ready and the British Government was to undertake to recognize Argentine sovereignty within a period not to exceed 10 years provided that Argentina took into account the interests of the inhabitants of the Islands-interests that certainly should be taken into account. But the change of Government in the United Kingdom in 1970 also changed the course ofnegotiations and, in April 1973, the United Kingdom interrupted them. 43. In the same year, the General Assembly adopted resolution 3160 (XXVIII), in which it expressed grave concern at the fact that eight years should have elapsed without any substantial progress having been made in the negotiations and urged that they be pursued in order to put an end to the colonial situation. It also expressed "its gratitude for the continuous efforts made by the Government of Argentina, in accordance with the relevant decisions of the General Assembly, to facilitate the progress of decolonization and to promote the well-being of the population of the Islands" for which, since 1971, Argentina had been providing various services and material and cultural facilities. • I 44. It IS common knowledge that there are about 1,800 inhabitants on the Islands; for the most part, they are employees of the Falkland Islands Company or ofthe British Government, which has no permanent presence on the Islands. Therefore, the arguments now adduced by the United Kingdom in favour of the alleged right of its subjects in the Malvinas to selfdetermination seem rather strange. Equally surprising is the sudden concern of its representative about a 50. That position was ratified in the Declaration adopted by the Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries held at Colombo in August 1976, c:.nd at the Sixth Summit Conference, held in Havana in September 1979. 51. Despite the repeated requests of the United Nations and of the ~ovement of Non-Aligned Countries, the refusal of the United Kingdom to put an end to that colonial situation through negotiations led to the recent past events, wherein the colonial.Power displaced the bulk of its military, naval and air might, 65. In 1973, the General Assembly adopted resolution 3160 (XXVIII), in which it expressed concern at the fact that eight years had elapsed since the adoption of resolution 2065 (XX) without any substantial progress having been made in the negotiaticms. On that occasion, the General Assembly expressed its appreciation for the efforts of the Argentine Government, in accordance with the relevant decisions of the General Assembly, to facilitate the process of decolonization and to promote the well-being of the population of the Islands. The Assembly urged the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to proceed without delay with the negotiations to find a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute in order to put 'an end to the colonial situation. At the time, 78. We believe it unnecessary to dwell on the historical facts that, under international law and the American doctrine of uti possidetis juris, fully back the claim of the sister Republic of Argentina. However, we find that today, in the twentieth century, there are those who, when it suits them, disregard the rules of international law and peaceful coexistence among peoples by obstinately denying realities and by hanging on to a past era that has no further justification for existence. Those who assume such attitudes cannot expect anything but the condemnation of the peoples, since to try to maintain colonialist enclaves, apart from running counter to the spirit of the Charter ofthe 80. However, in spite of having recognized those rights, Great Britain invaded the Malvinas Islands in 1833, expelled by force or imprisoned the legitimate Argentine authorities, and expelled the original population of those territories. 81. History also tells us that, in 1833, after Great Britain's invasion and armed occupation of the territory of the Malvinas, the Argentine Republic protested against that usurpation, and over the years has co~tinued to protest against the invasion and illegal occupation of the Islands. Since then it has been endeavouring to recover full sovereignty over its territory, on the basis of international law, since, like the overwhelming majority of States Members of the United Nations, it does not accept as valid the acquisition of territory by force. In this respect, the Organization has spoken out clearly in condemning this kind of policy in any part of the world. 82. We must also recognize the readiness of Argentina to seek a solution to the dispute with Great Britain through negotiation. Thus, in 1965, the General Assembly adopted resolution 2065 (XX), with no opposing votes, recognizing the existence of a dispute concerning sovereignty and inviting the parties to proceed with peaceful negotiations bearing in mind the provisions and objectives of the Charter and of resolution 1514 (XV), as well as the interests of the population of the Malvinas Islands, as the only viable means of putting an end to that colonial situation. 83. After eight years of frustrated negotiations -frustrated not because of Argentina's intransigence-in 1973 the General Assembly adopted, again without a single opposing vote resolution 3160 (XXVIII), in which it reiterated the existence of a dispute over sovereignty and made a further appeal for 3peeding up negotiations in order to arrive at a peacethrou~hout this draft resolution. 98. In accordance with this view, and in order to 93. Ecuador's position on this subject, which is a o defend the principle of territorial unity, Ecuador has question of honour and which, for our region, has supported Namibia's right to keep Walvis Bay as clear legal and historical roots, is not a new one nor part of its territorial integrity on the date of its indehas it just come about as a result of the regrettable pendence, which we all so desire. events in the South Atlantic this year. Before, during and after those events, Ecuador has supported the 99. Furthermore, the invitation to the parties to claim of Argentine sovereignty over the Malvinas resolve the Malvinas dispute through direct negoti~- 'M~~ 100. It should be pointed out that a de facto cessation of hostilities exists in the region, as was already clearly stated by the Minister for External Relations of Argentina, Mr. Aguirre Lanari, in the general debate [14th meeting]. All that is now needed is that an end be put to the maintenance of postures reflected in the military presence of warships, unduly large garrisons and the arbitrary occupation of maritime regions on our continental shelf, which are unacceptable to those who believe in peaceful coexistence and in the paramount importance of the system of direct negotiations betwe~n the parties in order to a~hieve a peaceful solution of any ~erritorial dispute. 101. On the other hand, the right to self-determination cannot be invoked in areas where there is a territorial dispute. This new form of neo-colonialism threatens the gradual dismemberment of any State on the basis ofthe introduction ofalleged settlers, occupation forces, administrative dependencies and purportedly technical or exploratory missions that actually have as their purpose the achievement of a permanent presence overseas, thus abusing the concept of selfdetermination. 102. We Latin American countries, which support the draft resolutionjust submitted, have held consultations on each of the concepts in the text, as well as with all the various geographical and political groups participating in the General Assembly and, heeding their views, we have inserted changes suggested in those consultations in order to make it easier to gain the support of the greatest possible number offriendly countries, with whose ideals we agree since we are all simply trying to achieve a recommendation aimed at beginning negotiations in the framework of the United Nations. This would make it possible, at a time considered appropriate by the Secret8ry-General in his consultations, for these negotiahons to be started. When that happens, the values and usefulness of the United Nations will be reaffirmed and a climate of greater understanding and co-operation among its Members will be created.

The Charter of the United Nations obliges Member States to "settle their international disputes by peaceful means" and to "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use offorce" . These are obligations cherished by my small country, for we possess neither economic nor military might and we are therefore vulnerable to the advt::ntures of larger, more powerful States. Our only defence against such adventures is a universal commitment to the obligations of the Charter and to the United Nations ~tself. 104. From the outset of the hostilities in the South Atlantic, we strongly supported efforts to avoid conflict and urged both parties to seek a peaceful solution, for 109. In our view, the cause of peace in the South Atlantic and the welfare of the people of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) would be better served through quiet efforts by the Secreatry-General to narroW the areas ofdifference during a period ofcalm and restraint. Such efforts should avoid the glare of publicity and even the floor of the General Assembly and its Committees. 110. But, beyond all that I have stated so far, there is an overriding issue of great concern to Antigua and 111. We must be mindful that the draft resolution before us falls short of acknowledging that the wishes of the people of the Falklands are paramount and pre-eminent considerations. In our view, any draft resolution which fails to accord the opportunity, without any constraints, to the people 'Of the Falkland Islands (Malvbas) to determine their own future in accordance with the principle of self-determination does not address the need for a comprehensive and enduring solution. 112. For all those reasons, Antigua and Barbuda cannot support the draft resolution. But let not our inability to support it be construed as an anti-Argentina or a pro-British positiQn. It is neither. Rather, it is a stand for principle ~md right, a commitment to the obligations under the Charter of the United Nations and a plea for time in order that good sense may prevail. 113. ~itVe do not believe that it is beyond the creative capacity of Argentina and the United Kingdom to settle theil differences within the framework of the Charter. We believe that they should be provide,d with the opportunity to settle those differences in their common interest and in the interest of international peace and security. We do not believe that this draft res~lution will assist at this time in creating su~h an opportunity.

The decision of the General Assl~mbly to include item 135 on the question of the Maivinas Islands in its agenda and to consider it directly in plenary meeting fully reflects the impclrtance which this question has always had. Suriname welcomes this step because my Government is convinced that the United Nations has an important role to play in assisting the parties concerned to reach a peaceful and just settlement. 115. Recent developments regarding the Malvinas Islands have dramatically called the attention of the international community ~o the continued existence of colonial situations in Latin America and elsewhere in the world. These developments dearly demonstrate that the decolonization process has not yet ended and that the last v(~&tiges of coloniaiism, if maintained by the coloni~l Powers, can endanger international peace and security. . 116, The question of the Malvinas Islands has three important aspects: fir')t, the ending of colonial rule over the Malvinas Islands, which started with the military takeover of the Islands in 1833; secondly, the restoration of the sovereign rights of Argentina over the Malvinas Islands, which include South Georgia and 131. That approach seemed not only to symbolize the difficulties and the hope but also to project a positive outlook both for the future of the inhabitants of the Islands and for improved relations between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Argentina, not to mention the overall objective of regional peace and security. That trend should have been sustained and nourished. Since then, of course, that ray of hope has been displaced by a dense black cloud, and the recent unhappy contlict over the Falklands has cast a long shadow over the prospect of future progress. My delegation will pass over in sorrowful silence its regret at the senseless loss of life and equipment that was the main hallmark ofthat savage conflict. 132. Even now that the fighting is mercifully ov~r, we in Malta still find ourselves in a difficult situation on this question. As a small island country not immune to outside pressure but fiercely resistant to it, our first instinctive consideration naturally is the primacy of the wishes of the inhabitants and the need for a peaceful solution. 133. The relations that we already have with both of the protagonists we desire to improve. We sense the strong feelings of the countries of South Amerif::a on this q~estion and we cannot but be impressed by the widespread continental support behind the draft resolution presented for our consideration. We see in that sponsorship reassuring indications ofa deteffliination faithfully to carry out its provisions. At the same time, of course, we appreciate the inherent difficulties and the present intensity of feeling that stand in the way of an early and equitable solution. The detailed documents and opening statements presented by each of the protagonists are sufficient indication of the complexity of the question. 135. Britain prides itself on its valid contribution to the process of decolonization. Many of us might not be here to sp\~ak ifthat process had not in fact gathered momentum in the post-war years. It is now in its final phase, and the positive momentum should be maintained rather than reversed or brought to a grinding halt. 136. Against that background, the recent conflict was therefore all the more deplorable. In its aftermath, time will be needed for the wounds to heal and for the wiser counsel that was and remains necessary to be restored so that a peaceful and enduring solution, through neg::>tiations without any prior conditions, will be reached, which respects the needs of today projected into the future and meets with the approval, primarily, of the people directly concerned, with due recognition of the special circumstances of the situation. 137. Some time will be necessary for this process, and we express the hope that, at this late stage and on this occasion, the time spent on negotiation will not be artificiallY prolonged. Ha3ty efforts may be counterproductive as, most certainly, was the illegal and in~emationally unacceptable attempt to solve the matter through the use offorce. But we must also point out that delay on one side which may be seen by the other as deliberate procrastination can be very provocative. 138. The resolutions already adopted by the United Nations should be our guide; the bilateral negotiations between the two protagonists, our reservoir of effort alr~ady expended; and the good offices of our indefatigable Secretary-General, our spur to further effort, so that a positive momentum can be restored and maintained. 139. I believe it can be asserted with conviction that the recommendations outlined in paragraphs 4 and 5 of document A/AC.109/712/Add.1, prepared by the Secretariat, could not have been as comprehensive and as finely tuned to meet the preoccupations of all concerned if matters had not received urgent and priority attention and if the good offices of the Secretary-General had not been used. The failure at that' time to respond positively to those suggestions can· be ascribed mainly to the inflamed passions prevalent at that particular period, arising naturally from the intensity of the conflict and the loss of life incurred. The wounds will, of course, require time to heal but they should not become another running sore in international relations; hence the need for third-party medication and mediation becomes all the more pressing: 145. My country's delegation takes the view that the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) is integral to the process or decolonization of Territories in various parts of the world once conquered by colonial Powers. It has been repeatedly asserted, both in the Security Council and in the General Assembly, that those Islands constitute one of the Territories whose colonial regime has to be abolished unconditionally, in accordance with the demands of the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. 146. The delegation of the German Democratic Republicjoins in the call of representatives from many States for the conflict in the South Atlantic to be settled speedily and on a just basis, so as to prevent the current more tense international situation from deteriorating even further. Therefore, it is expected of both parties to the Soutll Atlantic conflict that they display the necessary readiness to settle the existing problems by mak!ng full use of all the peaceful means available. A prac:ticable way of achieving this would undoubtedly be through negotiations between the parties concerm··J, with the Secretary-General acting as mediator. 147. It soon became manifest during the conflict over the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) that it involved the global and strategic interests of the imperialist system as a whole. The leading imperialist Power, the United States, was very quick to abandon its pretended neutrality by taking sides in both the politicodiplomatic and the military field, thereby ignoring treaties with and alliance commitments towards the Latin American nations. That attitude appears as a logkal result of a policy line which~ during the iast 10 y,ears, has increasingly looked to the South Atlantic as another are~ of significance to the United States. n Qt~ite clearly, owing to its strategic location at the crossroads of the major sea lanes, which makes it a springboard for the Antarctic and a potential operational base against the independence and progress of peoples in the region, that group of islands i.; to be given the same role there and the same fate as Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean and other imperialist military bases. 148. As soon as the conflict began to jeopardize the political, economic and strategic interests of imperialism, the workings of its internal solidarity were put into high gear. NATO practically took part in the conflict as a military alliance. Collective sanctions and boycott measures were applied, in violation of international law. The intention to extend NATO's range ofaction and competence so that it would include the South Atlantic was clearly demonstrated. Therefore, the proposal of the States parties to the Warsaw Treaty, launched by the organization's Committee of Foreign Ministers when it met in Moscow recently -namely, that the two military-political alliances, NATO and the Warsaw Treaty organization, should abstain from extending their respective ranges of action to further regions-Asia, Africa and Latin America-appears very timely. 154. Although the war ended with the reoccupation of the Malvinas (Falkland) Islands by British troops, the dispute between Argentina and the United The meeting rose at /./5 p.m. NOTES 3 A/10217 and Corr.l, annex, para. 87. 4 A/C.3/35/4, annex.