A/40/PV.92 General Assembly
I should like to propose
that the list of speakers in the debate on this item be closed today at 12 noon.
If I hear no objection it will be so decided.
It was so decided.
I call on the Rapporteur of
the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the
Declaration on the Granting of Independeiice to Colonial Countries and Peoples,
Mr. Ahmad Farouk Armouss of the Syrian Arab Republic, to introduce the report of
the Commi ttee.
Mr. ARNOUSS (Syr ian Arab Republic), Rapporteur of the Special Commi ttee
on the situatio:l wi th regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the
Granting of Independence to Colonial Cauntr ies and Peoples (Special Committee
of 24): As Rapporteur of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the
Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial
Countries and Peoples, I have the honour to introduce to the General Assembly
chapter XXVI of the report of the Special Committee (A/40/23 (Part VIII), which
relates to the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas).
In its consideration of the question, the Special Committee was guided by
General Assenbly resolution 39/91, of 14 Decenber 1984, on the implementation of
the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples,
and by resolution 39/6, of 1 November 1984, relating to the Territory.
In connection with its consideration of the question, the Special Committee
heard statements on the item by the Permanent Representatives of the United Kingdom
and Argentina, as well as a statement by the representative Councillor of the
Legislative Council of the Territory and two individuals having an interest in the
question.
Following its consideration of the item the Special Committee, at its l285th
meeting, on 9 August 1985, adopted the draft resolution which is set out in
paragraph 14 of the chapter. In that resolution the Commi ttee, among other things,
once again urges the resumption of negotiations between the two Governments and
reiterates its support for the renewed mission of good offices of the
secretary-General.
The statements I refer to are to be found in the verbatim record of the l285th
meeting of the Committee (A/AC.109/PV.1285).
Mr. ~PUTO (Argentina) (interpretation from Spanish): Once again the
issue of the Malvinas Islands is before the United Nations General Assembly for
consideration.
Argentina has never ceased to claim sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands and
the South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands as an integral and inseparable part of
its territory. More than a century and a half ago, the United Kingdom forcibly
stripped my country of its sovereignty over those islands. But that forcible act
did not strip us of our rights; nor did it diminish the legitimacy of our claim
before the international community. As everyone knows, this issue lies at the
SR7cial Commitee of 24)
heart of the dispute and the problems which exist today between Argentina and the
United Kingdom. No one is unaware either of the fact that the democratic
Government of Argentina has stated its willingness to resolve this issue through
peaceful negotiations. That most definitely is not an empty statement but a firm
decision of my Government, a decision we have taken in respect of all international
disputes in which my Government is or may be involved. It is also the expression
of its aspirations and hopes in the face of existing conflicts throughout the
world. It is the expression of our conmi tment to co-operate in all endeavours to
resolve such issues peacefully. We believe tha t rational think ing in deal ing wi th
problems, the intelligence to devise solutions and tbe will to understand one's
neighbours and adopt practical and flexible positions - in short, the struggle for
the rule of law and the search for equality aoong nations - will reduce suffer ing
and anxiety which at present oppress the world because of injustice, intolerance
and arrogance in the international arena.
The Argentine Government is convinced that the rule of international law and
the peaceful settlement of disputes, in addition to being the very basis of
peaceful coexistence aoong nations, also provide today the oost practical, simple
and effective way to resolve conflicts. That is what we found when we put an end
to our century-long dispute with Chile over the Beagle Channel. That is what we
continue to believe as we co-operate in the quest for solutions to the problems
with which we are concerned in our region and in the world at large. That is the
view we maintain when we seek an understanding with the United Kingdom to resolve
the issues that divide us at present.
In this endeavour Argentina has found continued and useful co-operation in the
United Nations, for which my Government is profoundly grateful. Similarly, we wish
to expcess OtH7 gratitude to the Secretary-General for his continued interest and
(Hr. Caputo, Argentina)
arduous search for the indispensable ~approchement conducive to fruitful
negotiations.
No negotiations are under way at present between Argentina and the United
Kingdom to resolve their differences. Despite the goodwill expressed by ay
Government, it is clear to all that the possibility of initiating such negotiations
is at present blocked.
(Hr. Cllputo, Argentina)
Paced with this situation, a group of countries friendly to both sides has
proposed that the international community, represented by this General Assembly,
urge them to begin the dialogue. To prevent anyone from feeling inhibited about
supporting this appeal, these friendly countries expressed the wish that the draft
resolution contain no term or reference which could suggest that a position had
been taken in favour of one side or the other. The draft resolution which begins
by confirming that a controversy exists, simply recommends that the fundamental
method recognized by the international community, that is to say peaceful
negotiations between the parties involved, be applied to this case.
The Argentine Government has given serious thought to this proposal and after
much discussion on the sUbject has decided to vote in its favour in this Assembly.
I feel it is my duty to explain to this Assembly the main considerations and
reasons my Government has taken into account in making this decision, both to state
clearly the Argentine position and, I hope, to assist in clarifying the meaning of
the draft resolution to be voted on in the General Assembly.
First, I must emphasize that the proposed text does not inclUde references or
terms which Argentina values highly and which were contained in previous draft
resolutions. In voting in favour of this draft resolution, the Argentine
Government is undoubtedly making a gesture of good will to facilitate the opening
of negotiations.
The importance which Argentina attaches to the basic principle underlying the
peaceful settlement of disputes arises from Argentina's concern with the question
of what would happen if it were not applied as soon as possible to this case.
(Mr. Caputo, Argentina)
Indeed, it is clear to the international community that failure to resolve
this dispute is already engendering problems which go beyond the bilateral sphere,
affect the rest of the international community, and could become uncontrollable.
An example of this fact is the problem of the fisheries in the South Atlantic
where there is a risk of squandering a major natural resource and creating serious
disruptions in world markets. Another issue which Argentina views with special
apprehension is that of the militarization of the area. As we have already stated
in other forums, the Argentine Government is obliged to state here the concerns it
has with respect to the existence and magnitude of the military fortifications and
equipment the united Kingdom has installed on the Malvinas Islands. Beyond the
limited intentions which may have led some members of the British Government, the
political leaders, and, undoubtedly, the wishes of the people of the United
Kingdom, the presence of such military installations in the face today of a
non-existent Argentine military threat, their disproportion in relation to the
population and resources of the area, will sooner or later lead to their being
justified in terms of strategic objectives which go beyond the mere defence of the
Islands and their inhabitants. Thus, a source of world tension will be created in
an area where it did not previously exist, causing a serious threat to the peace
and stability of the whole region.
Confronted with these risks and others which may arise, the Argentine
Government is fully aware of the fact that the most simple, rapid and effective way
of eliminating such dangers resides precisely in the initiation of negotiations
between Argentina and the united Kingdom to resolve the dispute as a whole. That
is Why it has taken a favourable view of the meaning of draft resolution A/40/L.l9,
whereby the international community, regardless of any other consideration, urges
the parties to negotiate.
(Mr. Caputo, Argentina)
The Argentine Government has also taken into account the opinion of its own
people with regard to this probleM. Ever since democracy was restored in
Argentina, the consolidation of peaceful and civilized coexistence both within our
domestic ~unity and with the world at large has been a basic goal of the
Government. In the view of the Argentine Government there are not, nor can there
be, two different policies in this respect, one within the country and another
outside it. That is why, as I have already stated, it has adopted the principle of
the peaceful settlement of international disputes as one of the basic tenets of its
foreign policy. That is how we have proceeded and will continue to proceed. That
is also why we believe it indispensable that the international community support
the full validity of these principles in the case of the Malvinas Islands without
prejUdging - I repeat, without prejudging - the claims of either of the parties.
If this is not done, if the nations which comprise the United Nations do not
understand this procedure, what other course would be open to solve this dispute?
Fortunately, we have discovered that the desire to have this dispute solved
peacefully is shared by many Governments and peoples in the world, including many
important political figures in the United Kingdom. In our talks with the latter we
discovered the extent to which problems which appear to be insoluble allow for
solution if they are approached with good will, good faith and imagination.
This certainty, which is also shared by a large group of countries friendly to
both nations, has been a decisive factor in the acceptance of the short draft
resolutio~ now before this Assembly. We felt it was our duty to take this step to
make it easier for all nations to support this draft resolution. We would be
extremely happy if the present British Government would also give it its support so
that once and for all, in a rational and civilized manner, we could begin to
resolve our differences.
(Mr. Caputoi Argentina)
As opposed to the wishes of Argentina and, I believe, a large part of the
international co....nity, we have seen with regret that the united Kingdom has
proposed an amendment to the draft resolution wherein reference is made to the
pr inciple of self-determination.
I say with regret because that amendment, by introducing an element which
refers to the positions of the parties and may prejudge the final solution to be
found in the negotiations, distorts the aims of the draft resolution and hinders
the efforts of those who introduced it as well as the step taken by Argentina to
promote a peaceful settlement of the dispute.
I say with regret, too, because the amendment may cast shadows and create
confusion about the position of Argentina regarding two questions to which it is
especially attached, namely, the application of the principle of self-determination
of peoples and the fate of the inhabitants of the Islands.
Argentina has been and always will be a staunch champion of the principle of
self-determination of peoples. How could it be otherwise, since we became a nation
precisely by struggling in the name of that principle. Many are the delegations of
Governments present here which also became nations as a result of the exercise of
self-determination, and they all know that Argentina has always ranked high among
those countries which most strongly and consistently struggled to have their
independence consecrated in the international community and all forums. I believe
there is no better testimony of our support of the validity of this basic principle
in our modern world. Yet, too, all nations are aware that there are other no less
fundamental principles which are also valid within the international community,
such as the right to territorial integrity, the non-acceptance of the occupation of
territories by force, and the limited rights of a foreign people to legitimize such
acts.
(Mr. Caputo, Argentina)
This last issue ie what is under discussion in this case and, if, in order to
facilitate the initiation of negotiations, Argentina agreed that these principles
should not be included in the resolution - even though previous resolutions
contained them - it would be ludicrous to introduce instead that principle which
the United Kingdom favours in order to prevent the opening of negotiations.
Aside from its inherent meaning and of the fact that its application in this
case is questionable for the reasons I have just given, the reference to the
principle of self-determination could cast doubt on Argentina's attitude towards
the population of the islands. This is also a matter of regret for Argentina, the
population of which was formed by great immigration flows and which has been and is
one of the countries where the greatest degree of tolerance, openness and
understanding prevails towards people of all origins. Our tradition and our
practice have been to respect within our frontiers the most diverse forms of life
and cultural patterns. Consequently, there is not, nor can there be, any
rejection, but only respect and assurances from Argentina as to the way of life of
the present inhabitants of the Malvinas Islands and their residence therein.
In addition to distorting the meaning of the draft resolution and BOwing
confusion, the amendment proposed by the united Kingdom raises doubts about its
intention.
As we stated earlier, Argentina has always staunchly defended the principle of
self-determination. We are, however, surprised to find that the United Kingdom
proposes that it be applied in this debatable case, when only 15 days ago in the
Security Council, it vetoed its application in the case of Namibia, where the need
for its application is beyond any doubt. It is more understandable - but also
strange - that, to solve the question of Hong Kong, the united Kingdom has in fact
reasonably accepted the prevalence of the principle of territorial integrity over
that of self-determination. To us, this attitude seems most praiseworthy.
(Mr. Caputo, Argentina)
Unfortunately, this selective and arbitrary attitude on the part of the united
Kingdom casts doubts on its intentions in submitting the amendment in document
A/40/L.20. Does the United Kingdom truly want self-determination to be applied in
a polemical case, or does it merely want to frustrate the urgings of the
international community to have a dispute solved peacefully?
Argentina is not afraid of discussing around the negotiating table with the
United Kingdom each and everyone of these problems. Our Government is firmly
convinced that, as I stated earlier, with goodwill, good faith and imagination, all
the differences between the two countries will progressively be resolved. We
believe it would be a positive contribution to the work of the United Nations on
its fortieth anniversary for both nations to sit down at a table in order to begin
to solve the dispute in a peaceful, civilized and rational manner. It is not in
vain that Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations states:
•••• t~ bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles
of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of disputes or
situations which might lead to a breach of the peace.·
Draft resolution A/40/L.l9 merely requests that that principle be applied in
this case. Argentina accepts the draft resolution. We would also like the
Government of the united Kingdom to accept it.
I have addressed this Assembly on behalf of a Government which is the
expression of the free will of the people, of a Gouernment which indeed today
represents the Argentine people, and of a Government which, together with our
people, has chosen the path of reason and good jUdgement.
That is why today, along with many countries, we speak the common language of
democracy, the same language which the united Kingdom should speak. It is with
this shared language that we will be able to negotiate.
(Mr. Caputo, Argentina)
Mr. MACIEL (Brazil): My presence at this rostrum today to take part in
the debate on item 23 is not determined by the desire or the need to reiterate the
position of the Brazilian Government on the question of the Malvinas. OUr position
is, I believe, well known. My purpose in coming to this J:ostrUIl now is simply to
introduce formally draft resolution A/40/L.19 on behalf of all its sponsors -
Algeria, Brazil, Ghana, India, Mexico, uruguay and Yugoslavia.
Mine is an ec3Y task, because the proposal we are submitting for the approval
of the General Assembly is a very simple one and it has been made even easier by
the interpretation which the Government of Argentina has already given from this
rostrum of the text which members have before them. This draft resolution is
short, clear and straightforward. In all it has eight brief paragraphs, written in
direct language and with one main objective in view. It aims at bringing together
two Member States to initiate negotiations in the spirit of the Charter of the
united Nations wit~ the help of the Secretary-Genoral, who would later inform the
General Assembly on the progress made.
I do not think that any elaborate explanation of our paper is really
necessary. Nevertheless, I beg the Assembly's indulgence to make a few
observations to bring out some of its essential features. Some of these points
have already be~~ touched upon by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Argentina.
The most important point which I would like to make relates to the nature of
the proposal. This draft resolution is not a substantive one. It is an
instrumental or procedural one. It does not make reference to past resolutions on
the matter, to avoid being interpreted as being slanted one way or the other. It
does not touch on the merits or demerits of any national pOsition. It is a neutral
document, a procedural draft and, as such, cannot affect and does not affect any
position of principle or political position taken by any of the parties involved.
It. will be inCUllOeRt on the two countries, Argentina and the united Itingdoll, .
throUgh consultations, with the. assistance of the secretary-General if they so
choose, to organize their agenda, to det.erllinewha.t should be on the agenda, to.
determine their methods of work, to fix the venue of their meetiltgs, and so on.
All the General Assembly would ask them to do is initiate negotiations on the
Malvinas or Falkland Islands and on ways of norm~lizing their bilateral ralations,
-in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, of which both are
Contracting Parties. In saying in accordance with the CharterS, the draft intends
to include in thAt expreasion'all the pertinent principles and provisions of the
Charter and the rights thereunderJ in other words, it does not exclude the possible
invoking by either of the negotiating parties of any provision of the Charter that
may be applicable to the questions being negotiated.
Both Argentina and the United Kingdom are countries experienced in the ways of
diplomacy and negotiation - the United Kingdom perhaps more so, because it is an
older country that in past centuries and recent years has negotiated with old
friends and former ex-enemies alike, always with success.
That increases our hopes that Buenos Aires and London will not fail to respond
positively to the appeal contained in this draft resolution and initiate
negotiations as soon as possible. As a matter of fact, I would find it
inconceivable that, in view of this possibility and the balanced and neutral
character of the instrumental draft before us, any ~untry represented in this Hall
could possibly deny its support to our proposal.
And yet I am also distressed to see that the United Kingdom has circulated
amendments in document A/40/L.20 which, if approved, would completely distort the
draft resolution.
Everyone recognizes that the principle of self-determination is one of the
cornerstones of the united Nations Charter. Everyone would also have to agree that
the phrase at the end of operative paragraph 1 - "in accordance with the Charter of
the United Nations· - covers the right to self-determination. But we are not
debating here the pdncil'le or right of self-determination, which is beyond
question. What is objectionable in the United Kingdom amendment is the fact that
it would explicitly introduce a substantive component into the text of a draft
resolution that would prejudice its merely instrumental nature. That would not
only ~e pleonastic but it would also destr~ the balance achieved in the proposed
draft resolution. Furthermore, the General Assembly is not acting as a mediator in
this case, and a condition for the success of its appeal is not to go into details
that should be defin~d by the negotiating parties themselves. Indeed, this ~raft
resolution is only an appeal, but an earnest appeal, to the two countries to
negotiate.
I am certain that the United Kingdom will reconsider its initiative, in view
of this explanation and especially in view of the two assurances I have mentioned
and which have been formally reiterated by the Foreign Minister of Argentina
himself, namely: first, that our proposal, by its very nature, cannot and does not
affect the positions of principle of either partYJ and, secondly, that the last
phrase of operative paragraph 1 - "in accordance with the Charter of the United
Nations· - includes all provisions and principles of the Charter.
Mr. PAZ AGUIRRE (Uruguay) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation is
a Sponsor of draft resolution A/40/L.19 on the "Question of the Falkland Islands
(Malvinas)". Uruguay, as a Latin American country of the south Atlantic region,
has a special interest in this problem, which closely affects it.
Indeed, the existence of a dispute in areas that directly affect the economy
and security of my country, a dispute which, moreover, affects its responsibility
under existing international treaties, for the maintenance of peace and security in
the region, is of deep concern to Uruguay.
OUr sponsorship of this draft resolution bears witness to that concern and is
in keeping with our inte~est in seeing that the Malvinas Islands conflict and all
related problellS be fully and definitively resolved through the peaceful settlement
of international disputes procedures, in accoreance with the United Nations Charter.
The first step, the basic' step called for by the international community, is
the initiation of negotiations between the parties involved, that is to say, the
Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and NOrthern Ireland.
The regrettable events of 1982, as we all know, have led to a serious
deterioration of relations between those two states which have a long tradition of
friendship and co-operation. The normalization of their relations is of interest
not only to the Argentine and British Governments - as they have already said
repeatedly that it is - but also to the international community as a wholeJ and
that normalization is closely connected with the peaceful and definitive solution
of all their differences.
It is not for this Assembly to prejudge the component elements or factors of a
substantive solution to such problems. But it is within the purview of the General
Assembly, within its generic competence, to consider any issue or question within
the limits of the Charter, and within its SPeCific competence to discuss any
question relating to the maintenance of international peace and security, as well
as to make recommendations concerning the peaceful settlement of situations that
may be harmful to general well-being or friendly relations amon~ nations. Within
that context, the General Assembly should take the steps it deems fit and timely to
contribute to an effective settlement of such situations or issues, taking into
account their own specific characteristics and conditions•
MY delegation consider~ that, in keeping with those paramete~s, in the
specific case before us the first step should be to enter on the first stage of
the procedures leading to a fully and mutually satisfactory solution, that is, to
give the initial impetus which will set an appropriate procedure in motion. This
is the rol.e which, in our view, the General Assembly should play in this instance,
by asking the parties to initiate negotiations with a view to finding ways and
means of peacefully and definitively resolving their differences and at the same
time request the Secretary-General to pursue and renew his good-offices mission in
order to bring the parties closer together and assist them in complying with what
is requested of them, thus interpreting the feelings of the international community•
Draft resolution A/40/L.19 is therefore exclusively instruaental. The
inclusio..'l of other elements, especially those relating to fundamental questions,
would not be relevant and JIlight prevent the attainment of the desired objective -
the initiation of a pl'ocess of negotiation between the parties.
iIlat we want, what we aspire to and what we are seeking for the good of all,
for peace and for understanding between nations is that Argentina and the United
Kingdom sit around the table to talk, to begin a dialogue that will lead to the
peaceful settlement of their differences. Once they are at the negotiating table,
they can at the right time put on the table all the fundamental utters that
constitute those differences.
For that reason, my delegation cannot support, and will vote against, the
amendJllents submitted by the united Kingdom in document A/40/L.20.
Nothing departs farther from the basis of my country's foreign policy than
disregard of the principle of the self-determination of peoples. Uruguay became an
independent State and joined the international community through the free exercise
of the right of its people to self-determination. However, in the context of the
question before us and of the scope of the draft resolution of which we are a
sponsor, the united Kingdom amendment, far from contributing to the negotiat!on,
would create a barrier to the opening of negotiations.
The amendment does not simply reaffirm a principle which, in any case, is
definitively enshrined in the Charter and has been at the very root of the actions
of this Organization; rather, it concerns the specific implementation of that
pr inciple with regard to the question of the Malvinas Islands. several pr inciples
of international law are involved in that question, and one of the basic
differences between the parties is recourse to different principles to solve the
substantive problem•
If now, in a draft resolution that is merely procedural, specific aentlon were
made of only one of those pcinciples applicable to the question of substance, the
result would be as follows: first, a substantive element would be introduced,
which would involve prejUdging the substantive solution and therefore jeopardizing
the possibility of the draft resolution's being accepted by one of the parties;
secondly, the text would become unbalanced by referring to only one of the
principles at stake, when other principles recognized by the Charter are involved,
such as those of sovereignty, the territorial integrity of States and the peaceful
settlement of disputes; thirdly, the exclusively procedural nature of the draft
resolution would be distorted, and its sole, fundamental objective - that of
promoting the opening of negotiations - would thus be frustrated.
Therefore, adoption of the amendment would not accord with the realistic and
sincere purpose of opening negotiations. It would give rise to the paradox that
the pr inciple of the self-determination of peoples, which was the very pillar of
the decolonization process, would in this instance hinder that very process,
creating an insurmountable barrier to its implementation. My delegation reiterates
that in the present situation over the Malvinas Islands what is important, what is
essential, what is the pre-condition of any approach to the problem, is the
beginning of negotiations. Draft resolution A/40/L.19 seeks that, and only that.
It does not deal with the principle of self-determination or other principles of
international law that mayor may not be applicable. It concerns negotiations on
the root of the issue between the parties. Other questions will be considered in
due course, but for that to be possible the parties must first sit down to talk, to
start negotiations; otherwise, we shall never begin and we shall have neither
negotiations nor solutions to the dispute.
My countrY')~ position on the basic issue is clear. We have always supported
Argentina's rights ewer the Malvinas Ielands, since it has better title to them,
but, as that is the difference with the United Kingdom, we believe this is not the
tille or the occasion to discuss that substantive matter.
I repeat thmt Uruguay has a special interest in a definitive solution being
found to the contrewersy since we are firmly convinced of the urgent need to end
the international tension in the south Atlantic and turn the region into a zone of
peace and co-operation. That is the purpose of the draft resolution, of which we
are a sponsor, whose effectiveness we believe would be totally destroyed if the
proposed aliena-nu were accepted.
.. In short, ray del.tion considers that by adopting the draft resolution the
General Assembly will aake a positive contribution to good relations between
nations.
Uruguay hopes for an open and frank dialogue between Argentina and the United
Kingac.. My country llalntains with both countries excellent relations, dating back
to the beginning of our nationhood. For the sake of that understanding and for the
sake of two friendly nations, Argentina and the United Kingdom, their interests and
their future relations, Uruguay hopes that a constructive dialogue will begin
without delay. That is why we believe that the General Assembly will make a
positive contribution to peace by adopting draft resolution A/40/L.19 as submitted,
wi thout the proposed aaendRents.
Hr. AIBAN-IDLGUIN (Colombia) (interepretation from Spanish): My
delegation will not repeat today the arguments that it has already put forward in
supp)rt of its position with regard to the subject before us. They are well known
to the Members of the Asselllbly •
(Mr. Paz Aguirre, Uruguay)
The purpose of fly statement is sillply to emphasize the importance my
Government attaches to the question of the Malvinas Islands. The matter has been
the focus of world concern because of those aspects that affect international peace
and security and the responsibilities and comndtments involved in compliance with
the Charter and the basic principles of internation~l law. Argentina, which has
made its future more secure with its return to its genuine democratic tradition,
has a right to see the necessary steps taken to lead to the establishment of the
appropriate framework for effective negotiations.
My country unreservedly supports a Peaceful, final settlement of the problem
in accordance with the Charter, the resolutions of the United Nations and the
decisions of the Non-Aligned Movement.
Argentina's claim is not, as some maintain, something tlHlt has become weaker
with the passage of time. The territory of the Malvinas has been, according to a
well-known Argentinian jurist, under the illegal administration of the United
Kingdom ever since it was occupied by force, with the expulsion of the legitimate
autho!ities, who were peacefully exercising the sovereignty deriVing from Spanish
rule.
(Mr. Alban-Holguin, ColOllbia)
we may ~el1 be living in the twentieth century and being concerned by the
interests of peoples. But what cannot be sw~pt away by words nor the pr ivilege of
being more powerful, are the rights legally aOIuired by states. The Argentine
Nepublic from the very moment of its independence inherited the territorial
jurisdiction and sovereignty which since the sixteenth century had been exercised
by the Spanish Crown. Argentina has never renounced that right.
It is worthwhile recalling paragraph 6 of resolution 1514 (XV), which provides:
"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 Nationsfi •
The historic claim of Argentina will continue to receive the attention and
solidarity of the international community as shown by the overwhelming support
which the General Assenbly gave to the resolutions on the subject: and to the
process of negotiation. My country continues to favour dialogue between the
parties, without pre-conditions as to the matter in dispute. Such a dialogue
should make use of the framework offered by the United Nations and should enjoy the
valuable assistance of the Secretary-General. Both parties have demonstrated their
genuine concern for their international responsibilities and that will certainly be
reflected in the dialogue between them.
We all kno-" the bonds of history and of continental solidarity which link my
country with Argentina. We have also maintained close and long-standing relations
with the United Kingdom. Our delegation has therefore evaluated this issue with
the objectivity demanded by its significance and importance.
Referring to this question on an earlier occasion, I said then that solutions
based on law in bilateral controversies have the effect of setting an example to
other countries; they prove that the rule of law is indivisible, that is to say, it
(Mr. Alban Holguin, Colonilia)
can be invoked in all circumstances in all geographical regions of the world. The
opposite is true when force is used since that would in every case constitute a
negative precedent, being directly contrary to what the international co_unity is
seeking. It is not just a matter of starting negotiations but of concluding them,
of seeing whether it is possible by means of the goodwill on the part of the
parties to reach viable legal solutions which, as in this case, demonstrate an
irreversible universal trend towards decolonization, one of the causes which the
United Nations has espoused so fervently since its creation.
'lbday the Asserrbly has before it draft resolution A/40/L.19 of which my
delegation is a sponsor .md in whi~ the General Assembly requests the Governments
of Argentina and the united Kingdom to initiate negotiations with a view to finding
the means to resolve peacefully and definitively all aspects on the future of the
Malvinas Islands in accordance wi th the Charter of the united Nations.
We reaffirm our confidence in the secretary-General and we shall continue to
support his efforts to continue his mission with both parties for the resumption of
negotiations with a view to bringing about a peaceful settlement of this dispute.
Furthermore, the Argentine nation has had the support and solidarity of the
Colorrbian nation ever since the Malvinas Islands were occupied. Now is the time
for the parties to enter into broad agreement.
Mr. SUCRE FIGARELLA (Venezuela) (interpretation from Spanish): This, the
fourth debate since 1981 on the question relating to the islands which
Charles Darwin visited as far back as 1832, and which we, the Spanish-speaking
peoples, call the Malvinas, reminds us, not without a heavy heart, that time moves
rapidly but not human attitUdes, which continue to be based on elOOtions, prejudices
and refusal to view reality objectively. It is obvious that events are left behind
and that very often memory does not wish to reflect the trut!"" :>f the past. Only
thus can we have a true criterion of justice, a yardstick for fixing our positions
on matters such as this one, so vital to the restoration of relations of friendship
and co-operation between two countries which have always maintained them.
When the delegation of Ve~ezuela makes this assertion, it knows that two
fundamental principles are at stake: the first involves international morality,
namely, respect for historic truth. The second is international law: the peaceful
settlement of disputes allOng States in accordance with the Charter of this
Organization which represents the highest degree of understanding among peoples.
I can say most truthfully that the delegation of Venezuela, in taking part in
this debate, is guided by those two principles. We are not prompted by animosity
against any country. With regard to Great Britain, quite the opposite is the case
for history has boued us with a high regard and respect for it. Q1r independence
was achieved with the help of the heroic British Legion which fought on our side at
the battle of Carabobo. The monument commemorating our heroes bears the names of
many soldiers of the British Legion. More important still, El Correo del Orinoco,
the newspaper which voiced the ideas of independence of our Liberator, and which
was published in my native city, Ciudad Bolivar, saw the light of day thanks to the
printing firm set up there by a brave and intelligent Englishmman.
The men who came to Latin America were liberals with no ideas of colonialism.
To them, the idea of independence was synonymous with freedom and democracy. They
were men who identified themselves completely with the cause of our independence
and stood together with us in opposition to colonialism. I shall not give their
names because I know that they represent the most noble causes of the
identification of Europe with liberalism in Latin America.
(Mr. Sucre Figarella, Venezuela)
I would venture to say that this is what the European coiRUa,ity thinks at
present when it views the future of Latin America as being the consolidation of
democracy, econollic co-operation and the elillination of colonialism.
In the light of the events we have experienced since what has been called the
Malvinas war, we must now objectively consider t.'le lIeaning of an anachronistic·
situation in our continent, the product of one of the countries which despite its
colonial past, believes that self-determination cannot exist without sovereignty
and that ~e defence of a territory is &lOre legitimate than any incidental
occupation resulti09 from the use of force.
For Venezuela, the lesson of the Malvinas is quite clear: which has the
greater claim, the presence of a group of people occupying a given territory for
reasons that are not legitillate, or the right to sOl7ereignty over that territory by
a country for reasons of history that no one can call into question?
In other words, are the hundreds of settlers liVing in the Malvinas Islands
worth more than the legitilll2lte right of a country having sovereignty over that
territory? This is not a confrontation between self-determination and
sovereignty. They are two contradictory concepts. It is simply the recognition of
determining to whom sovereignty of that territory belongs for inalienable historic
reasons.
(Mr. &lcre Pigarella,
vene~uela)
But my delegation believes that it Is not a question of establishing any
opposition between sovereignty and self-determination. Quite the contrary: we are
here in the United Nations to seek barllOny between the two principles. Those who
at present live in a territory that historically does not belong to them can very
well live in peace under a sovereignty that has no interest in denying them their
rights as inhabitants of a ~erritorr in which. although it does not belong to thea.
they can live in peace and in co-operation with their legitimate occupiers.
When the delegation of Venezuela analyses the draft resolution before the
Assembly, it knows that that is t~e criterion on which it is based. Historical
sovereignty is claimed. but without denying to i!llyone the right to live in peace in
that territory. It is because of that criterion that ~ delegation. having
examined draft resolution A/40/L.19, has decided to co-sponsor it. Between
self-determination and sovereignty, the interests of the United Kingdom and
Argentina complement each other. Let us not turn a simple cause into a complex
one.
My delegation appeals for ,> Jerstanding between two countries that can come to
an agreement. The important thing is for negotiations between them to begin. We
are convinced that the inhabitants of the Malvinas Islands will be respected and
that Argentina's inalienable sovereignty over the Islands will also be respected.
Mr. MOYA PALENCIA (Mexico) (interpretation from Spanish): For the fourth
year in succession, the General Assembly will have to take a decision on the
question of the Malvinas Islands, an item of vital interest to the Argentina
Republic and Latin America as a whole.
Venezuela)
Together with the two relevant Security Council resolutions of 1902, the four
~esolutions adopted by the General Assembly on this item give us a solid basis for
our deliberations and point the way towards a negotiated solution of tbe
fundamental aspects of the dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom. In
its resolution 39/6 of 1 November 1984, the General Assembly reaffirmed the
)rinciples of the United Nations Charter on the non-use of force in international
relations and the obligation of States to a~ttle their international disputes by
peaceful Deans. In that resolution the Assembly also reiterated its request to the
Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to resume negotiations in order to
find as soon as possible a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute and their
remaining differences relating to the question of the Malvinas. In order to assist
tne p{&~~1os in that task, the Assembly requested the Secretary-Genera1 to continue
his renewed mission of good offices.
In his report on this item, the Secretary-General points out that during his
many c~ntacts with the Argentine and British authorities, both Governments
reiterated their adherence to the principle of peaceful settlement of international
disputes and their desire to engage in meaningful dialogue. Nevertheless, he was
compelled to state with regret that, in spite of this,
-:It has not been possF7.e to develop a formula that would enable the two
parties to engage in the kind of talks fore~een in resolution 39/6-.
(A/40/891, para. 6)
Notwithstanding that, it is still our hope that the Secretary-General will persist
in his efforts, and we are encouraged by his readiness to do so.
For his part, the Foreign Minister of the AIgentine Republic,
Mr. Dante Caputo l has just repeated his country's position, once again expressing
his Government's desire to find a negot:3ted formula that would make it possible to
settle once and for all its differenceo with the United Kingdom over the Territory
of the Malvinas Islands and the Georgia and South Sandwich Islands. purthermore,
we are aware of the patient efforts exerted by his Government throughout this year
to work out an appropriate framework that could lead to a genuine understanding
between the parties. That framework, in our view, is set forth in draft resolution
A/40/L.19, of ~hich Mexico is a sponsor.
From the very ~ginning, the Latin American nations have viewed the conflict
in the South Atlantic within the context of this Organization's efforts to put an
end to the last vestiges of colonial domination. Faithful to our peace-loving and
Latin American traditions, we have supported efforts to find a peaceful, negotiated
solution to our disputes. ~hat is demonstrated by our efforts to solve the dispute
between Argentina and Chile over the question of the Beagle Channel, the efforts
aimed at economic co-operation within the Cartagena consensus, as it is called, and
the work of the Contadora Group to find a peaceful negotiated solution to the
Central American conflict. We therefore offer our resolute support and solidarity
to Argentina and encourage it to find a just, diplomatic solution to its dispute
with the United Kingdom. We were gratified to hear the sincere statements
repeatedly made in that spirit by Argentina's President, Raul Alfonsin.
We are concerned, however, at the continuing rigidity demonstrated in this
matter ~J the present Government of the united Kingdom. We would have hoped that
on this occasion it would heed the legitimate aspirations of the Latin American
peoples and the opinion of the international community in general. But we are once
again faced with an attempt to produce arguments with the idea of evading
substantive negotiationa on the question of the Malvinas. My delegation has
already had occasion to note that the argument about the rights of the people of
the Islands to self-determination in fact conceals the intention to prolong an
illegal occupation. Resoluti(.;n 1514 (XV) makes it very clear that the right to
decolonization through the exercise of the right to self-determination is valid
when the peoples concerned have been subjected to foreign domination. That is not
true of the inhabitants of these islands. In the case of territorial enclaves,
resolution 1514 (XV) establishes that decolonization consists precisely in
restitution to the State that has sovereign rights over them.
We ~herefore believe that any amendment in the contrary sense which seeks to
change draft resolution A!40/L.19, on the question of the Malvinas Islands, is a
distortion of resolution 1514 (XV). That is why my delegation, which has always
supported the principle of the self-determination of peoples, is opposed to such
amendments.
As in previous years, the Argentine Republic has reiterated its determination
to respect the legitimate interests of the inhabitants of the Islands and to take
them into account, in accordance with the relevant General Assembly resolutions.
Using the argument of self-determination is simply a way of postponing the
initiation of negotiations that would cover the question of the inhabitants of the
Islands.
(Hr. Moya Palencia, Mexico)
We are sure that the draft resolution we approve this year, of which we are
among the sponsors, will create the necessary conditions for our Organization to
reassert its decieion to apply the principles and provisions of the Charter to the
question of the Malvinas, al'ld that this determination will be accompanied by
diplomatic action to preserve the most elementary principles of international
coexistence. Thus it will be possible to initiate a serious dialogue between
Argentina and the United Kingdom, and to making use of the good offices of the
Secretary-General.
Mr. SHERVANI (India): The report of the secretary-General (A/40/891) on
the question under consideration provides a succinct and clear picture of how the
land lies with regard to efforts to promote a political settlement of the question
of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas). It is clear from this report, and is a matter
of regret, that the gulf that separates the positions of the two sides is of
considerable proportions. As the secretary-General himself has stated in his
report,
-despite the adherence expressed by both sides to the principle of peaceful
settlement of international disputes and their desire to engage in meaningful
dialogue, it has not been possible to'develop a formula that would enable the
two parties to engage in the kind of talks foreseen in resolution 39/6-.
(A/40/891. para. 6)
It is indeed a matter of disappointment to my delegation that there has been little
or no forward movement in the matter.
The position of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries on the question under
consideration has been unambiguous and consistent. It was reiterated most recently
at the Conference of Foreign Ministers of Non-Aligned Countries held in Luanda,
Angola, from 4 to 8 September 1985. At that meeting the Ministers, inter alia,
once again
(Mr. Moya Palencia, MexiCtj)
-reiterated their firm support for the Republic of Argentina's right to have
its sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands restituted through negotiations.
They reiterated their call for a resumption of negotiations between the
Governments ....: Argentina and the United Kingdom, with the participation and
good offices of the United Nations secretary-General-.
The Ministers further reaffirmed the need for any solution to take duly into
account -the interests of the population of the islands- and took note with
satisfaction of the will expcessed by the Government of Argentina
-to respect and guarantee the maintenance of the way of life of the islanders,
their traditions and cultural identity, includ!~g the use of safeguards,
guarantees and statutes that might be negotiated';:"
My Government believes that the question of the Mal"inas can admit only of a
political solution amicably negotiated between the two sides. We believe that it
is imperative that bilateral negotiations betwen Argentina and the United Kingdom
be initiated once again at the earliest possible time and with the broadest
possible agenda, including what the Secretary-General himself has described as the
-basic issue that lies at the core of their continuing estrangement- (A/40/89l,
pau. 6). we believe that both sides must display the requisite political will to
put aside the bitterness of the past and to make a fresh start, with pragmatism and
a sense of purpose. The secretary-General has reiterated his continued readiness
to assist in promoting such a dialogue between the parties. We are convinced that
his good offices will be a valuable factor in enhancing the prospect of progress
and eventual success.
Draft resolution A/40/L.l9 on this item, which is now before the Assembly and
of which my delegation is a sponsor, reflects in a concise and pointed manner what
we consider to be the hope and expectation of the international community, namely,
(Mr. Shervani, India)
that Argentina and the o-aited Kingdom will initiate negotiations with a view to
resolving peacefully and definitively the pending prOble.a between the two
countries,. inclUding all aspects of the future of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas),
in accordance with the united Nations Charter. The draft resolution also requests
the secretary-General to continue his renewed mission of good offices. It is our
belief that this draft resolution is essentially procedural. It does not claim or
seek to address the substantive aspects on which ~e two sides hold divergent
views, INch less take Ci· position on the.. Its sole purpose is to encourage the
beginning of a dialogue without pre-conditions of any kind. It is therefore brief,
balanced and unburdened by lllatters of detail or controversy. It is on th~~ basis
that we have sponsored and given our support to the text.
Our approach to the aEnd!lents sublli tted by the United Kingdom is shaped by
the very sa_ considerations. The amendments seek to introduce into the draft
resolution a substantive element, whidl, we subait, has no place in a procedural
text of this kind. SUch reference to substantive elements would deflect the thrust
of the draft resolution and distort the"balance that it now reflects. ~r draft
resolution seeks the endorsement of the Assellbly for the resumption of the dialogue
so rudely interrupted in 1982. No pr inciples or substantive elements have been
inclUded, since they are not s tricUy relevant to the purpose we have in mind. My
delegation, like the other sponsors, is therefore unable to accept these amendments
and earnestly hopes that they will not be pressed to a vote.
The question that we are considering once again today has proved to be complex
and difficult. It arQuses emotion, even passion, among those intimately involved
in it and affected by it. To many, the scars of 1982 are still fresh. we can only
make an appeal - in the name of peace, of peaceful coexistence and of the purposes
and principles of the United Nations Charter - that both sides cease to look to the
(Mr. Shervani, India)
past and turn their eyes to the future, a future in which this festering problea of
decolonization could be resolved peacefully once and for all; a future in whic::h
Argentina and the united KingdoDl could resu_ relations based on friendship and
co-operation, and their historical ties; a future in the shaping of which the
population of the islands could Jlake their due contribution. (Hr. Shervani. India) Hr. ALBORNOZ (Ecuador) (interpretation from Spanish): Ecuador has consistently supported Argentina's claim to sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands and has viewed with special favour draft resolution A/40/L.19 which was submitted by countries representing various regions of the world and has elicited the most favourable COlllllilents and wich support because of its .,deration and vis!'2n" especially because it is aimed at and inspired in the principle of the peaoeful settlerli!nt of disputes, which constitutes the very basis of the Charter and the primary objective of this world Organization. As announced by other Latin American countries, Ecuador too will sponsor draft resolutioo A/40/L.19. Moreover, given the interest repeatedly expressed by Argentina and the United Kingdom in normalizing their relations, Ecuador will be most happy to see the two countries starting negotiations as soon as possible in order to find peaceful and lasting solutions to all kinds of outstanding issues. To attempt to assess or to anticipate particular aspects of interest to one of the parties, even through the selective reference to some of the pr inciples in the Charter wi thout enunciating the others, would merely detract from the universal character of the text of the draft resolution and indeed distort its vision and noderation. For Ecuador the case of the Malvinas calls clearly for the application of the principles of territorial integrity and repudiation of the acquisition of a territory by force, regardless of the duration of its illegal occupation. That territorial integrity is based on the uti possidetis juris of 1810, observed by all the Ibera-AIDer ican CXluntr ies which acceded to independence in the nineteenth century with the same territorial demarcations of the then existing Spanish administration. The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples states 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 Nations· (resolution 1514 (XV), para. 6» It is for this reason that Ecuador reiterates the request contained in the draft resolution, strengthened by appeals made in past years by the General Asseubly, so that the two countries involved in the Malvinas question, with which we maintain cordial relations, might resume their talks and negotiations under the good offices of the secretary-General in order to find a solution to this issue. Fortunately, the willingness of Argentina to heed this appeal of world public opinion having been demonstrated, it is possible to hope that the United Kingdom will show the same disposition, especially after the recent and successful negotiations and the much praised cases of Hong Kong and Ireland, where it has shown a spirit of understanding and great vision in the achievement of negotiated solutions. Hr. 0RAM1lS OLIVA (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish); Ever since the United Nations began to deal with the question of the Malvinas Islands, Cuba has always made its position quite clear concerning Argentina's unquestionable sOl1ereignty over this territory which, historically and geographically, belongs to the Argentine people~ today we should like to reaffirm that position once again. It is not simply a question of principles, but also of solidarity with the fraternal peoples of Latin America who regard the occupation of those islands by the United Kingdom as an affront to the entire continent. Nevertheless, and despite the fact that in the light of international law and the decisions of this AsseIIbly there is no doubt about the legitimacy of Argentina's claims, the Argentine Republic has demonstrated a commendable attitude (Mr. Albornoz, Ecuador) towards th!! peaceful solution of this conflict which is in striking contrast with that of the colonial Power which, as demonstrated by the fact that we are once again discussing the matter in this forum, categorically refuses to vitalize the negotiations so eagerly desired by the international community. Draft resolution A/40/L.l9, which is before us, is convincing proof of the imagination and the flexibility which has been so clearly shown by Argentina in the search for a dialogue which would make it possible to tackle all problems of substance and find a definitive solution to this sensitive situation at the negotiating table. What we are all asking for is comprehensive negotiations between Argentina and the united Kingdom, which would enable them to restore confidence on solid foundations and to resolve the problem of the Malvinas in accordance with the Charter of the united Nations. Cuba supports this draft resolution and associates itself with it as a co-sponsor. Once again, ,",-,ld for as many times as may prove necessary, we add our voice to that of the peoples of our America to demand the restoration to Argentina of this portion of its territory still occ~pied by Great Britain, with the assurance that, as always, the voices of the many peoples in other parts of the world will join us in calling for international peace and security. The recent ministerial meeting of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, held in Luanda, adopted a Declaration which reiterated clearly and precisely the support of our Movement for the just claims of Argentina with regard to its inalienable rights to the Malvinas. It is not one region in particular which supports Argentina~ it is the vast majority of mankind which acknowledges the justice of its cause and which calls for a peaceful solution to the dispute. (Mr. Oramas Oliva, Cuba) The United Kingdom" with its wealth of experience and store of quintessential wisdom, could on this OCcaSiolil sake a substantial contribution to the easing of tension by restoring to Argentina what historically belongs to it, something which has been endorsed by several sessions of the General Asselli>ly, namely, Argentine sovereignty over the Malvinas. ORGANIZATION OF WORK
I
Today's Journal indicates
that three times are to be taken up tomorrow morning, wednesday 27 Novenber,
namely; Appointment of one member of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and
Budgetary Questions, the situation in Central America, and Critical economic
situation in Africa.
I have been asked to postpone discussion of the third item since conversations
that are being held in various quarters in the Assembly have not yet been
concluded.
The meeting rose at 12.30 p.m.
(Mr. Oramas Oliva, Cuba)