A/40/PV.63 General Assembly

22.  THE SI'l.'UATION IN KAMPUCHEA (a) REPORT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL (A/40/759) (b) DRAFT RESOLUTION (A/40/L.4 AND Corr .1) (c) REPORT OF THE FIFTH COMMITTEE (A. 40/846) Haji OMAR (Brunei Darussalam): Since its birth in 1945 the united Nations has exerted monumental efforts to fulfil its important role, particularly in the maintenance of international peace and security, the development of friendly relations among nations and the solution of economic, social and political problems through international co-operation. Despite all those efforts, however, the world we live in today is no more peaceful and stable than it was 40 years ago. There is a marked escalation of conflicts all over the globe. We heard ~tatements at the beginning of this session of the General Assembly that the world has witnessed more than l40 conflicts since 1945 that have cost the innocent lives of some 200 million human beings. At present, a total of about 12 million people are deprived of their homes and have been forced to become refugees in foreign lands. In this connection I wish to say that the United Nations is not solely to blame for this present state of affairs. Undeniably, the finger must point to those countries which have disregarded the principles of international law and the United Nations Charter. In the pursuit of their expansionary ambitions and their selfish interests they hve completely ignored the principle of the rule of law in international relations and the normal standards of civilized behaviour, thus causing the unsettled state of affairs in the world as we know it today. It distresses me to say here that one such conflict is going on in our region of South-East Asia - in Kampuchea, to be precise. In my statement on this agenda item last year, I began by saying that it was most regrettable that the General Assembly must once again consider the item on the situation in Kampuchea. This yea~ the Assembly of nations must yet again spend valuable t1me in discussing the same issue. As all of us here are aware, the situation in Kampuchea is not improving. Vietnamese forces are still in Kampuchea, and the Kampuchp.~n people continue to be denied their right to exercise self-determination. Since 1979 the international community, through this Organization, has repeatedly called for the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Kampuchea, the restoration of Kampuchean independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity and its neutral and non-aligned status. It was on 25 December 1978 that 120,000 Vietnamese troops invaded and subsequently occupied the sovereign State of Kampuchea, a Member of the United Nations and a founding member of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries. The Vietnamese intervened under the pretext of a Chinese threat to their security and in the guise of a saviour to rescue the Kampucheans from the genocidal Pol Pot .regime. Now, seven years later, the so-called Veitnamese saviours are stil in Kampuchea. Not only are the Vietnamese invaders are still in Kampuchea, but they are now consolidating their presence. As we all know, in November last year Viet Nam launched its biggest-ever dry-season military offensive along the Thai-Kampuchean border. Those military operations were deliberate acts aimed at the elimination of the resistance forces who are fighting for Kampuchean independence and sovereignty, thereby ensuring the continued presence of the Vietnamese in Kampuchea. This annual campaign has also caused untold suffering and hardship to tens of thousands of Kampuchean civilians who have been compelled to flee their temporary homes in search of food, shelter and whatever safety they could find. At present, 230,000 Kampuchean civilians are (Haji Omar, Brunei Darussalam) forced to seek temporary shelter in Thailand. It is only with the humanitarian relief assistance rendered by the Royal Thai Government, the United Nations agencies, international agencies and various other Governments that their sUfferings are being alleviated. We recognize the immense value of that assistance. w~ join other concerned countries in appealing to Governments and international agencies to continue and further intensify their valuable and praiseworthy efforts to ease th~ sufferings of these unfortunate refugees in the name of humanity. In the pursuit of their policy to legitimize the occupation of Kampuchea the Vietnamese troops also made unprovoked and deliberate intrusions into Thai territory, inflicting death and injury not only on Thai soldiers but also causing death to innocent Thai villages living near the border. (Haji Omar, Brunei Darussalam) My delegation strongly cndemns these illegal and hostile actions. We call upon Viet Nam to cease forthwith these unnecessary intrusions into Thai teLritory forthwith. The sovereignty and territorial integrity of Thailand must be respected. It is the solemn duty of all Members of this Organization to respect one another's sovereignty. The disturbing situation in Kampuchea and along the Thai"·Kampuchean border, if allowed to persist, will ir 4vitably exacerbate tensions in the region, thus increasingly becoming a threat to the peace and security of South-East Asia. In fact, the Kampuchean conflict remains the major obstacle to our efforts to promote peace and stability in the region within the framework of a zone of peace, freedom and neutrality. We are convinced that the resolution of the Kampuchean conflict will lead to peace and stability in the region. The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), of which Brunei Darussalam is proud to be a member, remains committed to seeking a peaceful, just and lasting solution to the problem of Kampuchea. Brunei Darussalam is fully committed to ASEAN's position. ASEAN is more determined than ever in its efforts to find a peaceful solution. In these efforts ASEAN has shown great flexibility. It is prepared to listen to and consider other viable proposals, including those of Viet Nam. In their tireless efforts to find a just settlement for the problem of Kampuchea, the ASEAN Foreign Ministers, on 8 July 1985, issued a joint statement appealing to Viet Nam to abandon its current hard-line policy of seeking a military solution and calling for Viet Nam, together with the Heng Samrin regime, to enter into indirect or proximity talks with the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea. The talks would be exploratory in nature and on an ongoing basis. This would be the beginning of the peace process. The discussion would be concerned essentially with the withdrawal of foreign forces from Kampuchea, the establishment of a United Nations control and supervisory commission, national reconciliation, an election sUPervised by the United Nations and the exercise of self-determination. We see the ASEAN propos~l as being very reasonable. We believe that such talks will lead to meaningful dialogue which eventually will lead to a solution acceptable to all parties concerned. The root cause of the problem in Kampuchea is the invasion of Kampuchea by Viet Nam. Therefore it is only appropriate for Viet Nam to engage in a dialogue with the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea, the legitimate and recognized representative of the Kampuchean people, the legitimate and internationally recognized Government of Kampuchea. The problem must be settled by the Kampucheans and Viet Nam, the Kampucheans being represented by their legitimate representative. Unfortunately, Viet Nam continues to be intransigent~ it continues to strengthen its position in Kampuchea instead of ~ithdrawing its troops, the purported withdrawal being merely normal troop rotation. This latest proposal by ASEAN is among the numerous efforts made in the search for a just and durable solution to the problem in Kampuchea. My delegation recalls the visit by the Secretary-General of the United Nations to our part of the world late last year to discuss peace for South-East Asia. Our special thanks are, therefore, due to the Secretary-General. We also wish to extend our deep appreciation to the International Conference on Kampuchea and its Ad Hoc Committee. We hope that the Committee will intensify its efforts to promote a better understanding of the conflict and to obtain the widest possible support for the efforts to bring about a settlement in Kampuchea. Viet Nam's military invasion and continued occupation constitute an act of interference in the internal affairs of Kampuchea and a violation of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of that country. We have repeatedly called upon Viet Nam to withdraw its forces from Kampuchea. My delegation continues to be distressed by the fact that the Kampuchean people are (Haji Omar, Brunei Darussalam) denied the right to determine their own destiny. This constitutes a gross violation of the Charter of the United Nations, an Organization of which Viet Nam is a Member. It is our earnest desire to see the whole of the SOuth-East Asian region enjoy peace and stability. We want to see its peoples living in peace and tranquillity. We want to see SOuth-East Asia as a region in which its peoples live in harmony. We want to see economic progress and development in SOUth-East Asia. Above all we want to see South-East Asia as a region free of conflict, where all States exist in peace, harmony and friendship with each another. All this will become a reality only if all States in the region, including the Indo-Chinese States, to exist peacefully with each other. All this will become a reality only if all States in the region commit themselves to respect each other's independence and sovereignty. Therefore we urge Viet Nam to cease its hostile activities and abandon its policy of domination in Kampuchea. The leadership in Viet Nam must have realized by now that the country is becoming more and more isolated. It is oeing left behind in economic development, lagging behind its neighbours. Brunei Darussalam has illways believ,~d in the peaceful settlement of disputes. We maintain that the solution to the Kampuchean problem is based on the total withdrawal of Vietnamese troops, the restoration and preservation of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Karnpuchea and the exercise of self-determination by the Kampuchean people. All these are amongst the elements reflected in the draft resolution before us today. The support of all countries for this draft resolution is, therefore, important. Our votes will not only demonstrate our genuine and sincere desire to see peace restOred resolved in Kampuchea, but will lend support to the desire of the peoples of the region to live in peace and stability•. We are not insensitive to Viet Nam's security requirements~ we desire to live in peace with all our neighbours, including Viet Nam. Viet Nam (Haji Qmar, Brunei Darussalam) should realize that the draft resolution under discussion, which is overwhelmingly sUPported by the international community, would not only safeguard Kampuchea's security but also guarantee the security of all the States in the region, including Viet Nam. It is therefore in Viet Nam's own interest to accept the United Nations settlement proposal. In closing, 1 wish to reaffirm my country's continued support for the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea, under the presidency of Prince Norodom Sihanouk, in its just and legiti~ate struggle to restore independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity to Kampuchea. Mr.OSMAN (Somalia): My delegation wishes first of all to associate itself strongly with the secretary-Generalis hope, expressed in his report on Kampuchea, Nthat, with the good will and ••• co-operation of all parties concerned, it will be possible to put an end to the int~n~e suffering which has been the tragic lot of the peoples of the region for so long and to enable them to look to a future of peace, stability and prosperity". (A/40/759, para. 22) (Haji Omar, Brunei Darussalam) We deeply regret, however, that the realization of this goal continues to be bloCked by foreign armed intervention and occupation in Kampuchea and the denial of the right of the Kampuchean people to self-determination, free from outside influence. These policies have violated fundamental principles of the United Nations Charter and have engendered hostilities which not only prolong the suffering of the people of Kampuchea, but also seriously threaten regional and international peace and security. Faced with that situation, the world community is rightly concerned over the slow pace of progress towards a comprehensive political settlement which would bring peace to Kampuchea and the SOuth-East Asian region and would help to reduce international tensions. Concern for the suffering people of Kampuchea has also been heightened by reports that demographic changes are being imposed on them by foreign occupation forces, and by the fact that fighting and instability have again forced large numbers of Kampucheans to flee to the Thai-Kampuchean border in search of food and safety. The strong desire of Member States to see the restoration of peace and stability in Kampuchea is r~flected in the work of the Ad Hoc Committee of the International Conference on Karnpuchea and in the untiring exercise by the secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, of his good offices. My delegation highly commends these efforts and the peace initiatives of the members of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN). We hope that the various diplomatic approaches that are being made will succeed in establishing, at the very least, a sustained process of dialogue and negotiation. Regrettably, divergences of view, with regard both to form and to substance, continue to slow down the work of diplomacy. My delegation urges all the parties concerned to take part in discussions which would promote agreement on the format for negotiations and on the main elements for a comprehensive settlement. We are (Mr. Osman, Somalia) encouraged by the Secretary-General's indication that a reasonable degree of convergence has emerged on these elements, and we hope that new and vigorous efforts will be made to reach mutual accommodation. We believe it should now be clear that no interests are served by the prospect of unending conflict and human suffering. With regard to the main elements of a comprehensive political settlement, my Government fully concurs with the many United Nations resolutions which have called for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Kampuchea, the restoration and preservation of its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, the right of the Kampuchean people to determine their own destiny and the commitment by all States to non-interference and non-intervention in the internal affairs of the country. We believe that only the implementation of these measures can end the long agony of Kampuchea and enable the countries of South-East Asia to pursue the goal of establishing a zone of peace, freedom ~nd neutrality in the region. Meanwhile, generous emergency assistance must continue to be provided for Kampucheans in need, especially along the Thai-Kampuchean border and in the holding-camps in Thailand. We trust that donor countries, United Nations agencies and other national and international organizations will continue their humanitarian efforts, which have enabled hundreds of thousands of the victims of conflict and instability in South-East Asia to survive. The paramount need, of course, is for constructive political developments which would obvi~te the necessity for large-scale emergency assistance and allow Kampuchean refugees to exercise their inalienable right to return home in conditions of safety. Such an outcome would generate an intensive international effort for peace, reconstruction and development in Kampuchea. We reiterate our hope for the co-operation of all parties in bringing about these goals. (Mr. asman, Somalia) Mr. Lt Luye (China) (interpretation from Chinese): In this solemn Hall, the United Nations General Assembly has considered in six successive years the item "The situation in Kampuchea", and six times the Assembly has voted overwhelmingly in favour of resolutions calling for Vietnamese troop wi thdrawal from Kampuchea and realization of the right to self-determination by the Kampuchean people. We are glad to note that since the beginning of the current session leaders and representatives from many countries, ~pholding justice, have condemned the Vietnamese policy of aggression against Kampuchea and demanded that the Vietnamese authorities implement the relevant resolutions adopted by previous sessions of the General Assembly, withdraw their troops from Kampuchea and terminate their military occupation of that country. All this once again gives expression to the call for justice by the international community and the strong desire of the people of the world for a just solution to the Kampuchean question. A year has passed since the last session of the General Assembly adopted the resolution on the question of Kampuchea. The situation in Kampuchea has not relaxed, but has deteriorated further. The Vietnamese authorities' military occupation of Kampuchea and their. acts of aggression and expansion have not abated, but hav~ intensified further. Last year, soon after the General Assembly adopted its resolution on the situation in Kampuchea, the Vietnamese authorities launched a large-scale military offensive with massive troops equipped with tanks, guns and helicopters, against the patriotic armed forces of Kampuchea. Countless Kampuchean people were massacred, and tens of thousands of Kampuchean people were forced to drift into other countries. The Vietnamese aggressor troops also invaded the territory of Thailand on many occasions and carried out repeated military provocations. The "dry-season offensive" launched by the Vietnamese authorities shows to the international community once again that Viet Nam totally defies the United Nations resolutions, wilfully tramples upon the norms guiding international relations and, with a blind faith in force, attempts to wipe out once and for all the patriotic armed forces of Kampuchea by military means, so as to realize its ambition of annexing Kampuchea and dominating South-East Asia. (Mr. Lt Luye, China) The policy of hegemoniam, aggression and expansion pursued by the Vietnamese authorities has not only thrown the Kampuchean people into dire misery, but also posed a grave threat to the security of the neighbouring countries. It is the root cause of the tension in South-East Asia. In order to perpetuate their occupation of Kampuchea, the Vietnamese authorities have also intensified their colonial policy of Vietnamization. The emi~ration of hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese to Kampuchea has forced the local inhabitants to leave the land they have c~ltivated for generations and has reduced them to coolies. The age-old Khmer civili~~tion is being destroyed and the identity of the Khmer nation is being obliterated. Kampuchea, the erstwhile land of rice and fish, is now facing c serious threat of starvation. What the Vietnamese authorities have done in Kampuchea is a"full manifestation of neo-colonialism. Yet the Vietnamese authorities try to present themselves as the ·saviours" of the Kampuchean people, in an effort to hoodwink the people. The intensified pursuance of the policies of aggression and colonization in Kampuchea by the Vietnamese authorities in the past year serves as adequate proof that they are still clinging obdurately to military means of solving the Kampuchean question and that they have no intention whatsoever of withdrawing from Kampuchea and no sincere desire for a political settlement of the Kampuchean question. To co-ordinate their war of military conquest of Kampuchea, to cope with the tremendous political pressure from the international comm~nity and to achieve what they have failed to obtain on the battlefield, the Vietnamese authorities have gone all out to promote a "lie diplomacy" in the past year in the hope of confusing people's perceptions and fishing in troubled waters. In January this year the Vietnamese authorities put forward their so-called five-point proposal for settling the Kampuchean question, assuming a posture of willingness to seek a political solution through negotiations. Again, a few months ago, they proposed to "complete" their "annual partial withdrawal" of troops by 1990, asserting that it was Viet Nam's "consistent policy to respect the independence and sovereignty of Kampuchea". However, one might ask why, if the Vietnamese authorities consistently respect the independence and sovereignty of Kampuchea, as they have alleged, did they send troops to invade that country in the first place and suppress the patriotic forces in Kampuchea at a high cost in material a~d human resources. If the Vietnamese authorities are really willing to solve the Kampuchean question o why do they not simply withdraw their troops immediately from Kampuchea and let the Kampuchean people decide the future of their own country free from foreign interference? In fact, Viet Ram's political "..,...- settlement has a pre-condition. The basic point in the Vietnamese authorities' five-point proposal is the removal of one group of the resistance forces of Kampuchea so that they can wipe out all the resistance forces one by one. They have even brazenly proposed to let the puppet regime in Kampuchea take part in a general election as the only political party in that country. It is obvious that the Vietnamese authorities are attempting to use such a political solution to wipe out the patriotic armed forces in Kampuchea, which they have failed to do by force, legalize the puppet regime they have fostered and turn Kampuchea into Viet Nam's colony for ever. As for the troop withdrawal bragged about by the Vietnamese authorities, people have long learned what it means. We all remember that since 1982 the Vietnamese authorities have been talking about "partial troop withdrawal" every year. After three years of such "withdrawal~, the Vietnamese aggressor troops in Kampuchea have not been reduced in number. What we have seen instead are the large-scale military operations they launched in the Kampuchean-Thai border area under the cover of "partial troop withdrawal". Last August, while declaring their "completed annual partial withdrawal by 1990", the Vietnamese authorities attached (Mr. Li Luye, China) a pre-condition to such a proposal, and that is, that whenever they think "the ~ace and security" of the puppet regime in Kampuchea is "und~~mined", they will "take appropriate measures". Evidently, such appropriate measures mean the continued occupation of Kampuchea. To put it bluntly, this is not at all a proposal for troop withdrawal but rather a reproduction of the limited sovereignty doctrine. The Vietnamese authorities have time and again e~pressed their "willingness" to take part in negotiations, told many lies and put up smokescreens to that effect. However, last July, when the Association of Sc)"th-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) put forward a reasonable proposal for indirect talks, they dismissed it as "nonsense". They have brazenly violated the principle of non-interference in the internal affair~ of others - a norm governing international relations - and, using the domestic policy of Kampuchea as a pretext, have launched armed aggression against it and hung on there ever since. Now they have even made the disintegration of the Kampuchean resistance movement a pre-condition of a political settlement. If the international community yields to their unreasonable pre-condition, universally ~cknowledged basic norms guiding international relations - such as those concerning the self-determination of nations and non-interference in another's internal affairs - will be openly trampled upon, the peril of Vietnamese military hegemonism will spread further across the Kampuchean borders and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the South-East Asian countries will be subjected to an even greater menace. In short, the only existing obstacle to a political settlement of the Kampuchea question comes not from other quarters but from the vietnamese authorities, who are to this date still occupying Kampuchea and trying to reduce that country to a dependency and colony of Viet Nam. This is a fact that no "lie diplomacy" can cover up. History has repeatedly punished hegemonists and expansionists who-worship armed force, practise power politics, bUlly the-' sull and oppress the weak. The correctness of this law will eventually be borne oot in the question of Kampuchea. Relying on the support of a big Power, the Vietnamese authorities have launched seven dry-season offensives in K~,~~~ea, resulting in heavy losses of life and materials, as well as causin.g ~,eater difficulties in their domestic economy and stronger complaints from their own p'~ple. What have they achieved? Have the Kampuchean patr iotic armed forces been wiped out? No. Have the Kampucnean people been brought to their knees? No. The Vietnamese authorities, however, have landed themselves in a dire predicament, both militarily and politically, finding the going harder and harder. It is known to all that the Coalition C~vernment of Democratic Kampuchea, headed by Prince Norodom Sihanouk, and its patriotic armed forces have conducted a military redeployment of strategic significance after frustrating the seventh ' dry-season offensive of the Vietnamese aggrescor troops. Their main "contlat -forces are carrying ou,t extensive guerrilla warfare in thE) hinterland., Since the beginning of the monsoon this year they have bee~ attacking the enemy in various pr.ovinces throughout the country and in the vicinity of Phnom Penh, put.ting the Vietnamese aggressor troops in an unmanageable, passive and difficult position. As Pr'ince Norodom Sihanouk has pointed out, Viet Nam can wipe out the Kampuchean people's armed resistance movement only on paper. In the battlefield the Vietnamese aggressors can never defeat. the tripartite armed forces of the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea, which, inspired by lofty Patriotism, will continue their valiant struggle against the enemy. This demonstrates the strong will and determination of the Kampuchean people to defend their notherland. In trying to solve the Kampuchean question by military means the Vietnamese authorities will prove to be entering a blind alley. The Chinese delegation maintains that once the Vietnamese authorities abandon their policies of aggression and expansion and pull their aggressor troops out of Kampuchea it will not be difficult to settle the Kampuchean issue. The united Nations General Assembly has on many occasions adopted resolutionS on this question and the ASEAN countries hav~ put forward reasonable proposals for a just and reasonable settlement of the Kampuchean question in accordan~ with General Assembly resolutions and the spirit of the Declaration of the International Conference on Kampuchea. The Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea has accepted and supported the proposal for "indirect talks" put forward by the ASEAN countries. Democratic Kampuchea has also issued important policy statements regarding the present situation. All this is conducive to a correct political settlement of the Kampuchean question. If Viet Nam really has a sincere desire to settle the Kampuchean issue it should respond positively to all these developments. (Kr. Lt Luye, China) The Chinese Government firmly opposes the Vietnamese aggression against and occupation of Kampuchea and resolutely supports the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea, headed b~ Prince Norodom Sihanouk, and the Kampuchean people in their just struggle against Vietnamese aggression and for national salvation. In our view, the key to the settlement of the Kampuchean question lies in the immediate cessation of Vietnamese aggression and the unconditional withdrawal of all Vietnamese troops from Kampuchea. In order to make Viet Nam pull its troops out of Aampuchea at an early date, help deliver the Kampuchean people from the scourge of the war of Vietnamese aggression, restore Kampuchea's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity and remove the threat to peace and security in South-East Asia, the Chinese Government will continue to work together with all countries and peoples that love peace and uphold justice for a just and reasonable solution of the Kampuchean question in compliance with the relevant united Nations resolutions and the Declaration of the International Conference on Kampuchea. . The Chinese Government appreciates all the efforts which the ASEAN countries and many others hate made towards the restoration of peace in SOuth-East Asia and is in favour of the draft resolution on the situation in Kampuchea presented by those countries. We hope that the current session of the United Nations GQneral Assembly will continue to adhere to the principles it has upheld during the past six sessions - that Viet Nam must withdraw its troops from Kampuchea and that the Kampuchean people must be allowed to exercise the right to self-determination - so as to make new contributions to safeguarding the Charter of the United Nations and the norms guiding international relations. We appeal to all Member States to vote in favour of the ~raft resolution sponsored by the ABEAN countries and 52 other countries • (Mr. Li Lure, China) Mr. ONONAIYE (Nigeria): It is both unfortunate and regrettable, in our view, that we should be once again debating the agenda item on the situation in Kampuchea. We believe that the recurrent pre~cupation with the matter and the evident lack of a solution can only port~ay our cherished Organization in a bad light. We cannot but appeal once again for respect for the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and urge that every Member be faithful to its obligation ~nd facilitate the earliest realization of a solution to the Kampuchean question. The urgency of the renewal of efforts on the part of the parties to the conflict cannot be over-emphasized. We urge the earliest resolution of all eXisting differences, so that the peace-loving peoples of Kampuchea in particular and SOuth-East Asia in general can concentrate their attention on economic reconstruction and social development. It does a disservice to the United Nations and shows a lack of respect for concerned international opinion to continue to disregard the recommendations for a lasting solution to the Kampuchean problem. The International Conference on Kampuchea, held at United Nations headquarters ~ in New York from 13 to 17 July 1981, was the first effort by our Organization to identify the causes of the Kampuc~ean problem and to find a lasting way out of the impasse. The Declaration that came out of the Conference was very clear in its conclusion. It was recognized that the situation in Kampuchea had resulted from the violation of the principles of respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of States, non-interference in the internal affairs of other States and the inadmissibility of the threat or use of force in international relations. The impressive attendance at the Conference bore witness to the determination of the international community to stand up and speak out in defence of the values and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and other international inetruments. The deliberations and outcome of that historic conference also testified to the sincere desire of the overwhelming majority of nations to pursue a peaceful path of negotiations towards a political settlement in Kampuchea. The international Community justifiably anticipated that a sound foundation for the return of peace to Kampuchea had been laid. Since then, many years have rolled by. There is no settlement in sight. We are saddened to note that, instead of peace emerging in Kampuchea, the situation has worsened. The aggressors against the independence of Kampuchea are more vigorous in their determination to effect a military solution while at the same time projecting a behaviour pattern that continues to undermine the credibility of the United Nations, to which they profess allegiance. Innocent lives are being lost every hour of the day in Kampuchea because of the unchecked excesses of the occupation forces. (Mr. On(;~aiye, Niger ia) Those who managed to escape from the assault of the invading forces have been forced to accept refugee status in the Kampuchean-Thai border area and in other centres with no means of livelihood except to depend on the gene~osity of the international community and its humanitarian institutions. SChoolchildre~a are not allowed to develop their minds, while women and men cannot pursue their choice of livelihood but live in perpetual fear. There is no doubt that the refugee problem along the Kampuchean-Thai border has been further worsened by recent developments. The situation is grave and calls for a most urgent solution of the conflict. We believe that this can come about only through informal and formal dialogue between all parties and talks at the negotiating table. We rej~ct the use of force. The Kampuchean problem is a man-made problem which can and must be resolved by man. The requisite ingredients include sincere good will and the active co-operation of all parties to the conflict. This is the only way to put an end to the intense sUffering of the people, who are entitled to look to a future of peace, stability and prosperity. We are persuaded that the secretary-General is right in his assertion in his current report on the situation in Kampuchea that, -The events of the past year have demonstrated, once again, that the problems of the region cannot be solved by military means and that protracted confrontation can only generate further tension and enhance the risks of escalation. Clearly, the fundamental interests of the parties concerned and, above all, those of t~e ~ampuchean people will best be served by a peacefUl solution, reached through a process of genuine negotiations and mutual accommodation.- (A/40/759, para. 21) The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) has done very useful work in the common concern and search of its members for an acceptable framework for the settlement of the Kampuchean problem. We implore them to be resolute in their determination to bring peace to South-East Asia. They should not relent until parties to the conflict agree to sit at the negotiating table in search of a lasting and du~abte solution. As a member of the Ad Hoc Committee of the International Conference on Kampuenea, Nigeria would like to place on reco~d its appreciation and gratitude for . the humanitarian assistance provided by Governments, non-governmental organizations and other agencies to ameliorate the hapless plight of the refugees. we thank them sincerely for their continued commitment to give aid to the suffering people who have bean subjected to untold hardship. We commend the efforts of the secretary-General in all facets of the Kampucbean debacle. The international community must continue the search for an early solution. We believe that the time for peaceful negotiations under the auspices of the united Nations is now. Let us all celebrate the fortieth anniversary of our Organization with one worthy enterprise, the search for peace in Kampuchea without further delay. Mr. TILLETT (Belize): In aupporting this draft resolution the Beliz~ delegation would like to draw attention to the speech made a month ago by Mr. Dean Barrow, the Foreign Minister of Belize, when he add~essed this body and left no doubt in our minds of the importance and urge~cy that the Belize Government attaches to the situation in Kamp,lchea. He said, -My Government's world view generates the imperative for Belize to be an outspoken advocate for parliamentary democracy, for mutual co-operation among States in the world community and for scrupulous respect for the human rights and fundamental freedorns of our citizens." (A/40/PV.27, p. 47) Describing apartheid as a crime against humanity, he continued, -No less emphatic are we with regard to the need to safeguard the rights of the ••• Kamp,lcheans to re-establish their sovereignty." (ibid., p. 49) (Mr. Ononaiye, Nigeria) The situation in Kampuchea is another case of the oppressor bent on the submission and destruction of the oppressed peoples. The Belize delegation believes that the action of Vlet Ham in Kampuchea is just as despicable as apartheid in South Africa and should meet with an equivalent international outcry and pressures to have .Vietnam~se troops withdrawn from Kampuchea. OVer seven years ago Viet Ham invaded Kampuchea and has illegally occupied it since, killing hundreds of thousands of Kampucheans as well as some of its own people. Most recently, as General Assembly document A/40/7S0 shows, the Vietnamese have increased their atrocities by forcing the Kampucheans to walk through minefields. When will the Socialist Republic of Viet Ham bring this human carnage to an end? To maintain its position in Kampuchea these seven years, the SOcialist Republic of Viet Ham created a government of its own and called it the People's Republic of Kampuchea. As far as the United Nations is .concerned, there is no such entity as the People's Republic of Kampuchea; there is only Democratic Kampuchea. Yet on 28 OCtober 1985 Viet Ham issued the following statement, "The People's Republic of Kampuchea has declared on several occasions that any discussion whatsoever at the United Nations on the 'question of KamPuchea' without the assent and participation of the People's Republic of Kampuchea, sole genuine represe~tative of the Kampuchean people, constitutes an interference in the internal affairs of Karnpuchea, an independent and sovereign State, in violation of the United Nations Charter and international law." (A/40/8l4, para. 1) In paragraph 5 of this same statement, viet Ham gave this and other fr ivolous reasons for not participating in this debate today. That is like the rapist saying to the court, "You cannot consider this case without my assent and my participation". It grieves me greatly to see the Socialist Repulic of Viet Ram, a nation that so bravely and for so long fought for its own freedom, sovereignty and independence, now suppressing those same worthy goals of neighbouring, peace-loving peoples. If there was one nation desiring peace and committed to refraining from oppression, I would think it would be the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam. Very few nations in the last two decades have experienced the anguish of war like Viet Ram has. Having been freed from the burdens of the Viet Ram wars of the 1960s, the people of Viet Nam must have looked forward to a time of rebuilding their families, their rice fields, their economy and their infrastructure. Instead their hopes have been dashed to pieces, and now they see their own Government mercilessly inflicting upon the people of Democratic Kampuchea the same carnage they experienced only a short time ago. What is it that causes States to be dissatisfied with their own boundaries? Why cannot the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam see that the people of Democratic Kampuchea desire the same ideals for which Viet Nam fought so long and hard only just yesterday) namely to be left alone and be masters of their own destiny. The Belize delegation appeals to the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam to support the draft resolution before us, to withdraw its military and political occupation of Democratic Kampuchea and to genuinely assist and allow a return to peace in that region. Mr. IDHIA (Papua New Guinea): Mr. President, my delegation is most grateful and happy at the excellent manner in which this fortieth session has been conducted and guided by you. I hope this body will be guided by the same spirit and take appropriate and effective decisions in the interest not only of the Kampuchean people but the people of the world, so that all can live in peace and harmony. (Mr. Tillett, Belize) Since the Vietnamese invasion and occupation of Kampuchea in 1978, and despite the successive calls of the General Assembly for a comprehensive political settlement, the alarming situation in Kampuchea has remained unchanged. Once again the international community is confronted with the situation in Karopuchea. This intolerable situation in Kampuchea is the direct result of invasion by Viet Nam. We believe that Viet Nam has been trying to convince the world community that it is the saviour, and that its invasion has prevented much killing by the previous regime and th~s saved many lives. But the evidence points the other way. Since the installation of a puppet regime thousands of Kampuchean people have suffered, thousands have been killed, and others have fled to neighbouring countries to seek sanctuary. If in fact Viet Nam was the saviour, why is it still there, and why is it trying to impose its own will on the innocent Kampuc~ean people? For five successive years the General Assembly has repeatedly called for the withdrawal of all foreign forces, for respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Kampuchea, and for the exercise of self-determination by the Kampuchean people. We regret to say that the main instigator of the Kampuchean problem has bluntly refused to accept the wishes of the majority in this Organization, of which that country ,is a Member. Instead of responding to those calls for withdrawal, it still maintains its forces there. Apart from the political and security problems that have been created, the Vietnamese invasion has resulted in untold sUffering among the Kampuchean people. This has created enormous problems both within Kampuchea and among neighbouring States of the region. The Papua New Guinea Government has strongly condemned and will continue strongly to condemn the Vietnamese invasion and the subsequent occupational policies imposed upon the Kampuchean people through the installation of the puppet regime. We reiterate our strong support for the principles of the Declaration adopted by the 1981 International Conference on Kampuchea. In this context the Papua New Guinea Gover~~ent firmly believes that, in the first instance, the withdrawal of all foreign forces is imperative. This would lay the groundwork for genuine dialogue among the parties concerned in order to work towards a comprehensive political settlement of the situation. Because of our geographical location, our concern regarding the Kampuchean problem and its immediate resolution is both genuine and very important. Because of the interdependence of international relations my Government would like to see peace and stability restored in the Asia-Pacific region so that we may address more important questions such as the betterment of our peoples' lives, especially that of the people of Kampuchea. In this regard, as a sponsor of draft resolution A/40/L.4 and Corr.l, the Papua New Guinea Government wishes to commend the relentless efforts of the six member States of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) in their noble endeavours to attain a politi~.: ... solution through the process of mutual accommodation am:mg all parties concerned, including Viet Nan.. The ASEAN States, with the support of the international community, stand ready and willing to accommodate genuine dialogue and proposals from the Hanoi Government. In the last six years the international community has repeatedly voiced its grave concern at the plight of the Kampuchean people, who have suffered and continue to suffer today in untold numbers. We wish to reiterate to the international community our appreciation of the continued humanitarian assistance being given the Kampuchean people and of the Office of the united Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. However, we remain st~adfast in our conviction that a just and comprehensive political settlement eau only be brought about through the (Mr. Lohia, Papua New Guinea) exercise of self-determination by the Kampuchean people themselves, free of outside interference. We urge Viet Nam to take the first genuine step towards such a settlement by withdrawing all its forces without any preconditions. My Government would also like to place on recor.d its full support for the Coalition Government led by President Norodom Sihanouk, which continues to be effective and to enjoy wide " international recognition. In conclusion, my Government suppm:ts the call for immediate settlement of the Kampuo"ean conflict. Papua New Guinea believes that if this problem is not resolved the Kampuchean people will be the continuous victim of Viet Nam's military threat. Disregard of the United Nations General Assembly resolution demonstrates Viet Nam's disrespect for the fundamental principl~s of the United Nations Charter • Like all freedom-loving countries Papua New Guinea looks to. theaay when peace and harmony will return to Kampuchea. Such peace can be achieved only if the cause, of the unfortunate situation in Kampuchea is removed. Papua New Guinea ~elieves that the continued presence of Vietnamese troops on Kampuchean soil is a stumbling-block to the normalization of the situation. Until the Vietnamese forces withdraw, the conflict is likely continue. The withdrawal of the vietnamese forces can take place only if the Vietnamese adhere to all United Nations resolutions. Viet Nam, in fact, has repeatedly ignored United Nations General Assembly resolutions on the situation in Kampuchea and has thus far refused to consider the elements contained in the ~claration of the International Conference on Kampuchea, convened by the United Nations, which offers a balanced and practical negotiating framework for a comprehensive political settlement of th Kampuchean problem. Mrs. CASTRO de BARISH (Costa Rica) (interpretation from Spanish): As we all know, agenda item 22, on the situation in Kampuchea, has been before the United Nations for seven years despite the undaunted efforts of thn interna~ional community to provide a just and peaceful answer to it. The military occupation of Kampuchea that began with the invasion of Vietnamese forces on 25 December 1978 has been stubbornly continued, in defiance of the repeated and categorical demands of the international community embodied in six General Assembly resolutions, each adopted by an overwhelming majority of Member States from all parts of the world. A few minutes ago the representative of Belize compared Viet Nam's stubborn refusal to comply with United Nations resolutions to that of the apartheid regime in South Africa. The position of principle taken by Costa Rica reflects its desire to contribute to the efforts of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the States members of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Ad Hoc (Mr. Lahia, Papua New Guinea) COl1IIlittee of the International Conference on Kampuchea, as well as those of many Un!ted Nations MeJllber Stacces, to ensure respect for the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and internatinal law. The same can be said of other similar situations. At this fortieth.anniversary session of the United Nations we have heard many eloquent words uttered by Member States participating in the commemoration, all of which have stressed the vital importance of States' reaffirming the commitments they made on signing the Charter, in particular the commitment to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity, national sovereignty, political independence and self-determination of any State, whatever its size. This has been reaffirmed in the course of the debate on the item now under discussion. Emphasis has been placed on the need for peace and harmony to prevail, particularly, although not exclusively, between neighbo~ring States, since all other States without exception, must "live together in peace with one another as good neighbours· g as the Charter states, and settle any disputes that may arise by peaceful means, making use of the machinery provided for in the Charter. My delegation ~ishes to place on record its appreciation of all the efforts made by the secretary-General who, as he says in his report, is continuing "to follow the situation closely and to exercise his good offices in order to contribute to a comprehensive political settlement". (A/40/759, para. 4) ais emergency assistance to the Kampucheans who are still in need, especially along the Thai-Kampuchean border, is of vital importance and in keeping with the provisions of General Assembly resolution 39/5, of which my delegation was a sponsor, as it has been of all the earlier resolutions on this important matter. We have also noted with appreciation the efforts of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to alleviate the sufferings of the Kampuchean refugees and to assist Thailand, which has proved to be such a generous (Mrs. Castro de Barish, Costa Rica) we fully supported the Declaration adopted by the International Conference on . KaJllNchea, which established the &ppropriate framework for the negotiations that are so vital fot' the achievement of an overall polltical settlement of the situation in KaDIpUchea, in other words, the special machinery adopted by that Conference and approved by the General Assembly. We note with concern paragraphs 7 and 22 of the Ad Hoc CODiIittee's report on its activities during 1984-1985 (A/OONF.109/9). There we see that in its statements of 17 January and 15 February 1985 the Ad Hoc Committee expressed its serious concern at the escalation of hostilities along the Thai-Kampuchean border. It strongly deplored the military attacks by foreign forces against Kampuchean encampments in the border area, as well as their incursions into Thailand. The report stressed that those attacks had endangered the lives of a large number of innocent Kampuc:hean civilians, forcing them to seek refuge inside Thailand, and it called for an ilIlDediate end to such attacks. The report added that such attacks served only to impeae the search for a negotiated settlement of the Kampuchean problem. The Committee reiterated its conviction, which we endorse, that the problem can be solved only through peaceful means in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly. In this regard, we express our a~preciation to the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee, Ambassador Massamba Sarre of Senegal, who referred to this matter in his statement yesterday morning. we join the States members of ASEAN and othet' United Nations Members which share these concerns and wish to help strengthen and enhance the credibility of the Organiza~ion. In order to achieve that goal it is absolutely necessary to accept the pr inciple that strategic interests cannot and must not be allowed to prevail over the aspiration of peoples to freedom, nor must there be any infringement of their right to the true exercise of self-determination, to sovereignty and to territorial integrity. Costa Rica also supports the principle (Mrs. Castro de Barish, Costa Rica) that, &8 stated yesterday by the representative of Ecuador, "wars do not create rights- and the conquest of territory by force is illegal and null and void (A/40/PV.60, p. 51). It is interesting to recall in this connection that in his report to the General Assembly pursuant to resolution 34/22 the then secretary-General, Hr. !turt W41dheiJll, referred to the report of Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, who had been appointed special envoy to assess the situation in the field. (Mrs. Castro de Barish, Costa Rica) The Secretary-General commented as follows on that report: "Ris ~eport to me confirmed the gravity of the problems in the area, particularly e~ong the Thai-Kampuchean border, and the seriousness of the political and military factors that had compounded the appalling human SUffering being endured by the Kampuchean people." (A/35/50l, para. 5) My delegation commented that the situation in Kampuchea had become even worse since that report was received by the General Assembly in response to resolution 34/22. This showed that, despite the great efforts made by the Secretary-General, it had not yet been possible to find a political solution for the grave situation prevailing in Kampuchea. We see that, with the passage of the years, the situation is still continuing, and the present report on the situation in Kampuchea presented by the Secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, reiterate~ that foreign military intervention and occupation are still going on, that the foreign forces have not been withdrawn from KampucheaJ their presence is continuing to result in hostilities in the region, and this obviously represents a threat to international peace and security. The President of Democratic Kampuchea, Prince Nor6dom Sihanouk, has noted the suffering, the oppression and the violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms both in Kampuchea and in the border area caused by the Vietnamese occupation forces. This is a situation reported on by the international press, Amnesty International and the International Commission of Jurists. Similarly, decisions on the question have been adopted by the Economic and Social Council and resolutions on it have also been adopted by the Ruman Rights Commission. Another disturbing feature which amounts to an act of genocide is the imposition of demographic changes upon Kampuchea by the foreign occupation forces, with all the ensuing suffering entailed for the Khmer people. This has resulted in an (Mrs. Castro de Barish, Costa Rica) increasing influx of refugees into the territory of neighbouring Thailand. We wish to pay a tribute to Thailand for its efforts and the attitude of human solidarity it has demonstrated throughout this conflict, which has represented a heavy burden for its people, notwithstanding which its faith and its principles have enabled it to continue in its noble undertaking of assisting its unfortunate neighbour at great sacrifice, even including attacks on its national territory by Vietnamese forces. In view of all the foregoing considerations, my delegation is now co-sponsoring the draft resolution in document A/40/L.4 and Corr.l, presented so eloquently by Ambassador Moreno Salcedo of the Philippines on behalf of ASEAN and 57 other sponsors. In support of this document, which deals so comprehensively with the present situation, we wish to reiterate our conviction that a military solution is not acceptable for the problem of Kampuchea. We also wish to express the hope that, after a comprehensive political settlement of the question by peaceful means, the countries of South-East Asia will be able to devote their efforts to the establishment of a ~one of peace, freedom and neutrality in South-East Asia in order to reduce international tension and to achieve the lasting peace in the region that is so needed and so deserved. We hope that on this occasion, as in the past, the draft resolution will be adopted by an overwhelming majority. Mr. FLEMMING (Saint Lucia): This is the seventh year that the United Nations General Assembly has been asked to adopt a draft resolution on the item entitled wThe situation in Kampucheaw• St. Lucia has been a sponsor of and has voted for each such draft resolution since 1980. This year St. Lucia has joined 57 other countries in sponsoring the draft resolution before us. M¥ delegation is (Mts. Castro de Barish, Costa Rica) confident, as we were in previous years, that at the end of the debate on this item the draft resolution will, like past such draft resolutions, be adopted by an overwhelming majority. We are of the view that this draft resolution is just and fair. We also believe that it can form the basis for a comprehensive political solution in which the legitimate security interests of all the countries in South-East Asia, inl-.:luding Viet Nam, will be taken into account. St. Lucia and Kampuchea are some 12,000 miles apart. Last year, in my statement to the General Assembly on this item, I asked this question: why should St. Lucia be concerned about a conflict that is far from its shores and poses no direct or immediate threat to its security? The reason for our concern remains the same: an act of armed aggression against a sovereign Member State of this Organization has occurred. We believe that all of us represented here will sleep easier and more peacefully if this act is recognized for what it is. No amount of propaganda or sweet-talk from the State responsible for this act of armed aggression should be allowed to deceive or hoodwink us on this fundamental point. A viable negotiated political solution to the Kampuchean problem is possible only if that particular State implicitly acknowledges that it has committed armed aggression. In his speech to the General Assembly on 2 October 1985, Prince Norodom Sihanouk, President of Democratic Kampuchea, declared: "We Khmer' have never concealed our eager desire to seek an equitable and honourable political solution to the differences which pit us against our Vietnamese neighbours and their Khmer proteges in Phnom Penh." (A/40/PV.l8, Prince Sihanouk also noted: ·Yiet Nam and its proteges in Phnom Penh ••• have rejected all our proposals for peace, conciliation and guarantees·. (~.) My delegation would like to urge Yiet Nam to respond positively to these proposals for genuine negotiatiQns. The delegation of st. Lucia has voted with the countries of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), and we shall continue to do so, because the Kampuchean problem constitutes a serious threat not only to the ASEAN States but to all States, especially the smaller and militarily weaker ones. Consistent with the ASEAN Foreign Ministers' initiative of 8 July 1985, which was endorsed by the Council of Ministers of the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea on 28 August 1985 and again on 20 OCtober 1985 by th~ Inner Cabinet of the Coalition Government, St. Lucia urges Yiet Ham to enter into proxtmity talks with the Coalition Government as a means of finding a just and lasting solution for the situation in Kampuchea. (Mr. F1emming, Saint Lucia) The willingness of the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea to arrive at a political solution to this problem is abundantly clear. It has repeatedly pledged its intention to sign a non-aggression, friendship and co-operation pact with Viet Nam after the latter implements the relevant United Nations resolutions on Kampuchea. And only yesterday Prince Norodom Sihanouk, on behalf of the Coalition Government, offered to grant agricultural assistance to Viet Nam, following the signing of such a treaty. Viet Nam, too, has made a pledge. It has pledged to withdraw its forces from Kampuchea by 1990. However, Viet Nam's continued rejection of United Nations resolutions and proposals by the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) has left much of the international community sceptical vis-a-vis its withdrawal announcement of 16 August 1985. My delegation accepts Viet Nam's withdrawal announcement at face value. But, given the fact that the announced withdrawal period of five yea~s constitutes an arbitrary time period, we call upon the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam immediately to take the following three measures: first, enter into serious negotiations with the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea aimeq at achieving a cease-fire within 60 days) secondly, reduce the announced withdrawal period by one year, to be completed by 16 August 1989, thus allowing the Kampuchean people, who have suffered far too long, to begin the decade of the 1990s in an atmosphere free of intimidation) and thirdly, demonstrate good faith by effecting an independently verifiable withdrawal of 25 per cent of its forces within 60 days. The events leading to the Kampuchean problem are quite clear-cut. On 25 December 1978 Viet Nam, a militarily stronger State, launched an invasion against its militarily weaker neighbour, Kampuchea. Within a week the Government of Kampuchea fell. With its occupation forces in place and controlling the major towns and cities, Viet Nam imposed a puppet regime on the Kampuchean people. By invading Kampuchea~ 'net Nam violated the fundamental principles of the United Nations Charter gov~tning relations among sovereign States. These are; respect for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of States, non-interference in the internal affairs of States, non-resort to force in the settlement of disputes between States, and peaceful sElttlement of disputes. By its action, Viet Ham has threatened and is threatening international peace and security. As many other delegations have pointed out before, we are faced with a new and dangerous principle in international relations - namely, that a militarily stronger State has the right to attack a militarily weaker neighbouring State and impose a puppet regime on its people, simply because it does not like the Government of that State. The delegation of Saint tucia considers that to be an extremely dangerous precedent. Unless we resolute1y and consistently oppose it, it may come back to haunt some of us, especially the smaller and weaker States. If we allow this precedent to go unchallenged, we may one day find ourselves the victims of similar aggression. That is the main reason why my delegation supports the draft resolution on Kampuchea. We support it also because it is a fair and balanced draft which can form the" basis for negotiations aimed at reaching a comprehensive political solution. My delegation shares the yiews of the secretary-General as contained in his report dated 11 OCtober 1985, in which he reiterates his "conviction that the [Kampuchean] problem could not.: be solved by military means and that differences could only be bridged by a sustained dialogue on the basic elements for a comprehensive settlement". (A/40/759, para. 9) The Secretary-General added that these elements included, inter alia: withdrawal of all foreign forces from Kampuchea~ non-return to the universally condemned policies and practices of a recent past~ promotion of national reconciliationJ exercise by the Kampuchean people of the right to determine their (Mr. Flemming, Saint Lucia) own destiny; respect for the independence, territorial integrity and non-aligned status of Kampuchea; ensuring of the security and sovereignty of all States in the region; international guarantees for and supervision of the implementation of the agreements reached; and establishment of a zone of peace, freedom and neutrality in South-East Asia. All those elements are contained in the draft resolution before the Assembly. I urge members to give it their support. Almost seven years have passed since Viet Nam invaded Kampuchea and overthrew the legitimate Government of Democratic Kampuchea. There are still more than 150,000 Vietnamese troops occupying that unfortunate country. Notwi thstanding its protestations to the contrary, Viet Nam appears to want a military solution. However, Viet Nam has not succeeded, and will not succeed, in controlling Kampuchea. There are at least three reasons why Viet Nam has failed, and will continue to fail, to achieve what it set out to do in Kampuchea. First, Viet Nam is waging an unjust war, a war of aggression, in Kampuchea. The people of Viet Nam know it. Vietnamese soldiers are not fighting with the same kind of courage and sacrifice they showed during the Viet Nam war. That is because Viet Nam is waging a war of SUbjugation and annexation in Kampuchea. secondly, the Kampuchean people are valiantly resisting the aggressors. The Kampuchean nationalist resistance forces, led by Prince Norodom Sihanouk, are waging a courageous struggle for national liberation. Thirdly, the United Nations has refused to condone Viet Nam's action or to recognize the puppet Heng Samrin regime. That has given tremendous and inestimable encouragement to the Kampuchean people, in their hour of need, to persevere against overwhelming odds in their struggle to free their homeland from external aggression and occupation. Viet Nam has rejected the previous six United Nations resolutions on this item. There are no indications that it will accept the present draft resolution. (Mr. Flemming, Saint LUcia) That does not, however, make this a futile exerciAe. We have a moral obligation and responsibility to a Member of the United Naticms that has fallen victim to foreign aggression and occupation. Viet Nam may continue to choose to ignore the United Nations resolutions but it cannot ignore the weight and moral authority of international public opinion. By voting for this draft resolution, we can demonstrate once again that the international community will not condone aggression. The Kampuchean people need our support. This is ·indeed their hour of need. Ours, too, may come one day. Let us not fail them. I urge members of the Assembly to join the delegation of Saint Lucia in voting for this draft resolution. (Mr. Flemming, Saint Lucia) Mr. ZAIN Azraai (Malaysia): Speaking in the closing stages of this debate, my delegation would like first of all to reflect on the contention which has been advanced specifically by the delegations of Laos and Viet Nam, as contained in document A/40/8l4, that this debate should not have taken place at all, that "the continued polemics at the United Nations· - a'phrase, I may say, I had not expected to hear from two non-aligned countries - will only serve to exacerbate the situation and make a solution more difficult. My del,egation believes the contrary to be the case. We believe that this debate, like the others which have preceded it at six previous sessions of the General Assembly since 1979, helps - and has helped - the peace process because they serve to remind Viet Nam, the occupying Power in Kampuchea, as well as the Kampuchean people who are its unhappy victims, that the united Nations remains determined that justice will in the end triumph. The col1ectiv~ memory and the collective stamina of the international community are notoriously short-lived. These, at any rate, are the hopes of any aggressor. By reaffirming that we have not forgotten seven years after Viet Nam invaded and occupied Kampuchea, by demons~rating that we have the energy and the will to stay the course until peace, freedom and the right of self-determination are returned to the people of Kampuchea, this Assembly does service to those principles on which must rest the hopes of all of us - and particularly of small States - for a safe and just international order. My delegation asks the Assembly to reflect: what would be the fate of Kampuchea today if we had not persisted in these debates ever since 1979? The answer is surely all too clear. But, it may· be said, it is not the debate as such but the tone - the ·polemics· - which is objectionable. I trust that my delegation is not known for strident or extreme language. But we also believe in calling things by their proper names without heat and without rancour. Aggression is aggression, by whomsoever it is committed. Foreign occupation is foreign occupation, whoever may be the perpetrator. The denial of the right of self-getermination is inadmissible whether it applies to Namibians, Palestinians or Kampucheans. In saying that Viet Nam has committed aggression in Kampucheaf that Viet Nam remains in occupation of Kampuchea by force of arms, that Viet Nam continues to deny the Kampuchean people the right to choose their own government, Malaysia is merely stating irrefutable facts. Malaysia in not anti-Viet Nam - as·Viet Nam well knows. But we insist on stating the facts as they are, which is the only possible starting point for resolving the issues relating to Kampuchea"which are now before this Assembly. As regards the "polemics" of this debate, a reasonably unprejudiced observer must surely be struck by the generally modera~e and constructive tone of the statements which have been made here yesterday and today - as well as by the elements of the draft resolution contained in document A/40/L.4 and Corr.l which is sponsored, I remind the Assembly, by no fewer than 58 Member states, an ever increasing number representing countries from all regions of the world, aligned and non-aligned, large and small, developed and developing. The draft resolution is, remarkably, not anti-Viet Nam. Rather it stands for upholding the principles and pronouncements of six previous General Assembly resolutions on this item, namely, the withdrawal of all foreign forces from KampucheaJ the restoration and preservation of its independence, sovereignty and territorial integritYJ the right of the Kampuchean people to determine their own destinYJ and the commitment by all States to non-interference and non-intervention in the internal affairs of Kampuchea. These are surely indispensable principles for the maintenance of law and order and justice in the international community. My delegation suggests that this Assembly must also reaffirm them in the particular context of Kampuchea, if the avowals of faith in the principles of the Charter, which we have heard with (Mr. Zain Azraai, Malaysia) such eloquence during this commemorative session of the General Assembly, were not merely statements of general principles and generous purposes to be applied selectively and whenever convenient. In application of these principles, however, Malaysia and the member countries of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) have always demonstrated flexibility and sincerity to find a peaceful solution to the Kampuchean problem. Let me demonstrate this by going back a few years. In 1983, we made a Joint Appeal for Kampuchean independence, which called for a phased territorial withdrawal, a cease-fire and the introduction of peace-keeping forces, the establishment of safe areas for displaced Kampucheans, and the convening of an international conference for the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Kampuchea. The Joint Appeal also called for the exercise of the right of self-determination by, and the national reconciliation of atl - I repeat, all - Kampuchean factions. A year later, in 1984, recognizing that the problem of Kampuchea is essentially a problem involving the Khmer people and Viet Nam, ASEAN again urged the parties involved to enter into direct negotiations to facilitate the resolution of this tragic situation in Kampuchea. In July of this year, the ASEAN Foreign Ministers proposed that, as a prelude to a peaceful solution, proximity talks be held between the Coalition Government, led by Prince Norodom Sihanouk, and Viet Nam, in which representatives of the Heng Samrin regime could participate as part of the Vietnamese delegation. The proximity talks proposal was made by ASEAN in an effort to bring about a breakthrough out of the present diplomatic stalemate on Kampuchea so as to generate ·a momentum towards dialogue among the parties to the conflict. It is intended to create a dialogue process which it is hoped will lead to more serious and meaningful dialogue as mutual confidence and understanding are built, leading eventually to the convening of an international conference. Those proposals cannot by any measure be regarded as attempts to score debating or propaganda points. The conflict in Kampuchea is not only harrowing to its immediate victims, the people of Kampuchea, but endangers the long-term peace and stability of all of us in South-East Asia. It dissipates our energies and resources - which we can ill spare - and diverts them from more constructive pursuits for the development and progress of our peoples. We have no i~terest in the continuation of the conflict; rather, aside from its human dimensions for the Kampuchean people themselves, we have a national interest in its ending, and ending soon, in tranquillity and justice for Kampuchea and for all of us in South-East Asia. Hence we have made these proposals in a serious spirit, to initiate a momentum leading to serious negotiations. At the same time we have scrutinized each and every statement from Viet Nam for signs of a genuine wish to engage in such negotiations. Malaysia for its part regrets that it is not yet able to see any such signs. Instead we have seen much obfuscation. We have seen much clever propaganda and sophisticated diplomatic evasion. Above all, and regrettably, we have seen (Mr. Zain Azraai, Malaysia) Vietnamese action - and action ,speaks far~Quder than .words - wh~ch.raises fundamental questions about Vietnamese intentions. We have seen regularly each year the so-called dry-season offensive mounted with ever-increasing, intensity along the Thai-Kampuchean border, which last year saw the exodus of some quarter of a million helpless Kampucheans who fled to seek safety and succour in Thailand. We have also seen - and in the long run this may be the most pervasive and insidious threat of all - the continuing efforts of Viet Nam to settle Vietnamese nationals in Kampuchea in accordance with the avowed policy of Vietnamizing Kampuchea. In this way -new'facts" are created, as it were, which will make the resolution of this problem even more difficult. At present, reliable reports indicate that the number of Vietnamese settlers is some 600,000, settled in fertile and productive areas where food is plentiful. Amid the sounds of guns and diplomatic manoeuvring, this is a development which the international community must not overlook. But what of the propaganda? Let me first deal with the question of troop. withdrawals, already a familiar subject in this Assembly. When the notion of partial troop withdrawals was announced by Viet Nam some two, years ago the ASEAN countries were naturally interested. Regrettably, it was clear on closer examination that the exercise consisted in nothing more than the withdrawal of battle-weary and demoralized troops, to be replaced by fresh forces for use against the nationalist forces of Kampuchea. Troop withdrawals therefore had as much meaning as the notion that Vietnamese troops ion Kampuchea were "fraternal volunteers". Today Viet Nam no longer bothers to deny this. Instead we now hear about complete withdrawal by 1990, but that is so hedged with qualifications - essentially that'the Government in place should be a creature of Viet Nam - that it loses any serious meaning. As to the notion of regional dialogues, let me say only that Malaysia, like the other ASEAN"dountries, as bas be~n made clear by my colleagues, welcomes any and all dialogues with Viet Nam. In fact, meetings between individual poreign Ministers of the respective ASEAN countries and the Foreign Minister of Viet Ham have taken place practically every few months ever since the Vietnamese invasion and occupation of Kampuchea. The latest of these were the meetings held with the Foreign Minister of Viet Nam in Luanda during the non-aligned Foreign Ministers' meeting and with the State Minister and leader of the Vietnamese delegation to this session of the General Assembly here in New York. In addition, the ASEAN countries have designated the Foreign Minister of Indonesia their interlocutor with Viet N~~. We hope these discussions and conversations will continue and for our part we sha1i do all we can to facilitate the process. In fact, this very debate is intended to be yet another avenue for dialogue to explore each other's viewpoints and facilitate understanding of each other's concerns, fears, hopes and interests. Viet Nam's absence from this debate is therefore all the more regrettable. However, in relation to dialogue the important question is, dialogue about what? Dialogue for the sake of dialogue is meaningless. It can even be harmful because it gives rise to false hopes and expectations. A dialogue can be constructive only when it addresses itself to the crux of the problem, which - to repeat - in this particular case is the invasion and continued military occupation of Kampuchea by Viet Nam and the denial of freedom and the right of self-determination to the Kampuchean people. There are also issues affecting the legitimate security concerns of Kampuchea's neighbours. In this connection I must emphasize that the ASEAN countries have always assured Viet Nam in our conversations with that country that we are fully sympathetic to its security concerns. (Mr. Zain Azraai, Malaysia) The other issue in relation to dialogue is, dialogue with whoa? The ASBAH countries have been actively involved in the Kampuchean issue because of our devotion to the cause of Ka.'\:Pucb.aan freedom, because developments in ItUIPuchea have an impact on long-term peace and stability in South-East Asia and because we want to ensure that small countries do not become convenient victims of more powerful neighbours. Nevertheless it is obvious that the Kempuchean conflict primarily affects the Kampuchean people themselves on the one hand and viet Nam, which currently occupies their country, on the other. We recognize that the resolution of the Kampuchean conflict must satisfy all the Kampuchean people, all the Kampuchean factions, and meet the legitimate interests of Viet Nam as well as the other neighbours of Kampuchea. It is in that context that the ASEAN proposal for proximity talks must be understood, because it seeks to obtoin recognition of all the realities in Kampuchea. In this connection the Coali~ion Governnment of Democratic Kampuchea is a reality with which Viet Nam DUst come to terms in one way or another. The legitimacy of this Government is bey~d question, as again reaffirmed most recently by this Assembly with the adoption of the report of the Credentials Conunittee. The Coalition Government is led by Prince Norodom Sihanouk, whose indomitable devotion to Kampuchean independence, fierce pride in Kampuchean civilization and pioneering role in the non-aligned movement are beyond question. Despite the massive military onslaught it has had to face and despite attempts to create divisiveness within the different factions, the Coalition partnership has endured, its forces have remained intact, its morale is high and in the process the Coalition has gained greater political influence in Kampuchea and abroad than ever. This is a reality that somehow or other, sooner or later, Viet Nam has to' take into account. While our preoccupation has always focused on the search for a political solution to the Kampuchean problem, we must not forget the other dimension involving Kampuchean refugees who are innocent victims in this devastating war. In this regard, Malaysia as a country from the region wishes to express its heartfelt thanks and appreciation to the donor countries, to the United Nations and·its related agencies and to the many humanitarian and voluntary agencies which have provided food, shelter and clothing to the refugees. Without their assistance perhaps the Kampuchean people would now be close to extinction. The wor k, however, is far from completed. There are still thousands of refugees along the Thai-Kampuchean border awaiting resettlement. There are hundreds of thousands who are waiting to return to their homeland. We therefore continue to appeal to countr les that are in a position to assist to do all that they can. For all the assistance that has been rendered in every way, diplomatic as well as humanitarian, Malaysia would like first of all to pay warm tribute to the Secretary-General for his untiring efforts in the cause of peace and justice in the region, and in particular to his associates: Mr. Rafeeuddin Ahmed, Under-Secret4ry-General and Special Representative for Humanitarian Affairs in south-East Asia, to Mr. Tatsuro Kunugi, Special Representative for Co-ordination of Kampuchean Humanitarian Assistance ProgralllesJ to Ambassador Pahr, President of the International Conference on Kampuchea who, we believe, will soon be relinquishing his appointment, and to bbassador sarre of senegal, Chairraan of the Ad Hoc Committee of the International Conference on Kupuchea, and to other members of the Committee for their constructive efforts to seek a peaceful settlement of the Kampuchean conflict. It is some 10 years since the Viet Ram war came to an end. At that time when we thought of Viet Nam many among us saw a resolute and brave people who battled against extraordinary odds to attain its declared objective of peace, freedom, justice and unity. TOday, alas, when we think of Viet Nam we surely see a country mired in a foreign adventure that is as unpopular as it is unjustified, a country that is attempting to impose its will by force of arms on a weaker neighbour. In 1975 Malaysia publicly proclaimed its vision of a community of South-East Asia in which all the States of the region, irrespective of diffnrences in ideology and political and social systems could live in peace and harmony and mutual co-operation with one another. Today 10 years later, we still have not abandoned that vision. But a major obstacle has been created by Viet Nam as a result of its invasion and occupation of Kampuchea. Malaysia believes that the General Assembly, by conveying a clear message to Viet Nam that its adventure in Kampuchea is inadmissible and must be abandoned, can help to remove that obstacle. That is why we believe this debate is important. That is why we urge Member States to give their overwhelming support to the draft resolution that is now before us and in that w'ly put an end to the dark night of foreign domination for the Kampuchean people and usher in a new day for all of us in South-East Asia.