A/41/PV.91 General Assembly

19.  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECLARATION ON THE GRANTING OF INDEPENDENCE TO COLONIAL COUNTRIES AND PEOPLES: (a) REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE SITUATION WITH REGARD TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECLARAT!ON ON THE GRANTING OF INDEPENDENCE TO COLONIAL COUNTRIES AND PEOPLES (A/4l/23; A/AC.109/848-A/AC.109/857, A/AC.109/858 and Corr.l, A/AC.109/859-A/AC.109/868, A/AC.109/873 and Corr.l, A/AC.109/874 and Corr.l and 2, A/AC.109/877 and Add.l) (b) REPORT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL (A/4l/673) (c) DRAFT RESOLUTIONS (A/4l/L.33 and Corr.2, A/4l/L.3S, A/4l/L.37) (d) REPORT OF TiiE FIFTH COMMITTEE (A/4l/92l) Mr. ABISINITO (Papua New Guinea): Thank you, Sir, for giving my delegation this opportunity to speak on the issue of decolonization, particularly as it concerns the Pacific region. Colonialism is a manifestation of greed, ethnocentrism and imperialism. There is no defence whatsoever for the perpetuation of co10niali..:I1I, a system that degrades, exploits and above all denies to peoples the exercise of their inalienable right to self-determination and independence. It is most deplorable that those who profit from the outdated legacy of colonialism cODtinue to dominate other people for economic, political and strategic reasons. The role of the United Nations in the deco10nization process was e1oauent1y expressed in 1982 by the united Nations Secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuel1ar, when he stated that: ~The achievements of the united Nations in the historic process of decolonization are among the Orga~ization's most extraordinary achievements ••• B~t our satisfaction with those achievements should not halt. or diminish our efforts. On the contrary, we must focus our efforts on what remains to be done. There are many complex and difficult problems that must still be solved. It is importan~ to maintain the impetus achieved in the last two decades until we have achieved the final goal of complete decolonization". The majority of the Member States represented in this Hall, including my own, which gained independence with the guidance Df the united Nations, know very well the vital role the united Nations has played and continues to play in all deoolonization processes. The United Nation~ cannot perform that role effectively unless the Member States that make up the Organization give it their full support and extend their solidarity to the struggles of peoples to free themselves from the bondage of colonialism. The frustration and struggle of the Namibian people has evoked wide international support for Namibia's independence. Governments, non-governmental organizati~,s, institutions and private citizens all over the world have expressed their solidarity with the struggling people of Namibia. The message is clear: South Africa must cease its illegal occupation of Namibia. (Mr. Abisinito, Papua New Guinea) Namibia must unconditionally move towards independence. If that message is not clear to South Africa and to those who collaborate with that racist Pretoria regime, how else can that universal concern and appeal be brought home to south Africa and its friends? I should like to draw the attention of representatives to the colonial situation in New Caledonia. The representative of Fiji spoke for all countries of the Pacific in stating that the political future of New caledonia i~ an important issue of concern to the region, and one that must be resolved without delay. When my Foreign Minister, the Hon. Legu Vagi, addressed the General ASsembly on 10 OCtober this year, he outlined the Papua New Guinea Government's basic attitude to developments occurring in th~ Pacific region, including the situation in New Caledonia. Papua New Guinea and other Governments of the Pacific have consistently raised the issue of New caledonia at the united Nations since 1979. In the last three decades the United Nations has played a vital role in the decolonization process in many parts of the world, including the Pacific. The circumstances in New Caledonia and in the pacific region have reached a point where we now seek the active intervention of the Unit~ Nations. The United 'Nations must act new. It m~st act promptly and decisively on the'situation in New Caledonia. The purpose of the draft resolution on New Caledonia now before this Assembly is p~ocedural. It is Q request reaffirming New Caledonia's right to be reinstated on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories and to be recognized by the international community. Papua New Guinea believes that this is a case for the nations of the world to decide, not France alone. A historic step was taken in 1960 when the united Nations ~neral Assembly adopted resolution 1514 (XV) which solemnly states: -All peoples have the right to self-deterllination, by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development-. Why is the recognition that New caledonia should have a place on the United Nations list of Non-Self-GOverning Territories importan~? It is important for the' future of New caledonia. It is important for the future of the Pacific. Reinscription is a necessary step on the road to self-determination by the people of New Caledonia, and it is important for the achievement of a peaceful solution to the problems which have developed in the Territory. The just struggle of the Kanaks of New Caledonia must be recognized. The Universal Declaration of HUman Rights clearly recognized that individual h~man rights are no longer merely an internal domestic matter of sovereign States but are a conc~rn for all humanity. Tha South Pacific FOrum recognized the need for the Territory to move peacefully towards self-determination and' independence. Delegations will be aware of the decision made by the 13 member States of the South Pacific Forum to call for reinscription of New caledonia on the united Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. The 1985 COmmonwealth Heads of Government meeting held in Nassau, Bahamas, recognized the colonial status of New Caledonia, and reaffirmed their desire to see New CalQdonia attain independence peacefully. The recent summit meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement in Harare, Zimbabwe, strongy supported the South Pacific FOrum's decision, calling: -for self-determination and the early tra~sition to an independent New Caledonia in accordance with the rights and aspirations of the indigenous people". (A/4l/697, p. 75, para. 150) Those indigenous people are, of course, the Kanaks. The summit meeting also strongly urged that New Caledonia be reinscribed at the forty-first General Assembly session. The indigenous Kanak people have been sUb~ected to many forms of colonial oppression. Since the annexation of New Caledonia on 24 September 1853, France has introduced various forms of administration to deny the Kanaks opportunity for advancement, the most notable one set up in 1868 was a system of native reserves. The indigenous people were driven off their land and forced to live on waste and unoccupied land where wild animals once roamed. Ancestral Kanak land was taken over by the white settlers. Raving been alienated from their land, almost 80 per cent of the Kanaks live on arid reserves and remain very much outside the socio-economic structure of the Territory. The Kanak people have been deprived of the benefit of their natural resources. This was admitted by a Freftch Ambassado~ to Australia in a speech on 6 July 1983 when he said: "I willingly admit that, up to now, the status of the Kanaks, even if formally equal to the European one, has been inferior materially speaking". We are all aware that in 1946 New Caledonia was originally on the united Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. France unilaterally withdrew New Caledonia from the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories in 1947,· thus claiming it as an integral part of France. There is no justification for allowing the colonial situation in New Caledonia to continue. Pacific countries have kept abreast of all developments in New Caledonia in recent years. We have welcomed efforts by the French Government to engage in serious dialogue with the indigenous people of the Territory about their future. We have taken an active intere~t in plans by the previous French Government to allow the people of New Caledonia to e~ercise their right to self-determinAtion. But all these plans have failed to produce anything. NO satisfactory result has been achieved for the people of New Caledonia. The Pacific countries are now strongly convinced that the French Government is not genuinely committed to granting the PeOple of New Caledonia the right to determine their own future. The referendum that the French Government proposes to conduct in JUly 1987 in New Caledonia wi~l not be a genuine act of self-determination. Nb safeguards have been worked out to ensure that the indigenous people can exercise their righls. In flagrant defiance of paragraph 8 of the annex to united Nations resolution 35/118, the French Government continues to import Frenchmen from metropolitan France into New Caledonia. This massive immigration is the result of a conscious policy on the part of the French Government to outnumber the Kanak population and reduce the power of the independence movement. In a revealing letter, a former French Prime Minister, Mr. Messmer, wrote to Mr. oeniau, Secretary of State: ·We must seize this opportunity to create a francophone country. The French presence in New Caledonia can only be threatened ••• by a nationalist movement on the part of the native peoples ••• In the short term, a massive immigration. of French citizens from the metropolitan and overseas departments should allow us to avoid this danger by maintaining and improving the demographic r~tio amongst the ethnic communities ••• In the long term, the indigenous peoples' nationalist demands can be avoided if the non-Pacific ethnic groups represent a massive majority ••• •• It appears that all short-term residents, including military personnel, civil servants and others assigned to the Territory will be allowed to vote in the proposed referendum. Since 1983 France has built up and reinforced its military presence in New Caledonia. There are now over 10,000 French military and paramilitary personnel stationed in New Caledonia, whose population is slightly over 145,000. The presence of such a large military force serves to suppress and intimidate the indigenous people of New Caledonia and deter them from exercising their right to self-determination. The current French policies towards the Pacific region are of major concern to countries of the region. France's refusal to grant independence to New Caledonia, the nuclear-testing programme in the Pacific and attempts to bring terror to the region are just some of the dimensions of its current policies and activities in the south Pacific. Forum countries have circulated documentation during the current session of the Gen,ral Assembly dealing with the background facts on New Caledonia as well as current political developments ~n the Territory. The move to have New Caledonia reinscribed on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Te~~itories has been made after very careful assessment of developments in the Territory in recent years. We are convinced that there is no option now but for the united Nations to be actively involved in finding a just solution for the Territory and the Pacific region. Reinscription does not harm anyone. The various United Nations resolutions and the principles which have been developed over the last three decades must be honoured and applied to the situation in New Caledonia. (Mr. Abisinito, Papua New Guinea) We appeal to members to support us in protecting the rights of the struggling people of New Caledonia to free themselves from the bondage of colonialism. We call for support ~~ the strength of deco1onization and human rights principles alone. In this connection, we note with dismay reports that many Governments ha~e been subjected to economic cnd political pressure to keep them from doing what is right. Such tactics used by the French Government demonstrate its lack of regard for the decolonization principles. It is most deplorable that France should attempt to use its economic and political influen~e to deprive the people of Naw Caledonia of the international suppo~t they need. A vote for draft resolution A/41/L.33, which calls for the reinscription of New Caledonia on the United Nations list of Non-Self~Governin9Territories, is a vote for honesty and'principle. We should be failing in our duty if we did not act now to set the course for the people of New Caledonia to exercise their legitimata right to self-determination. Mr. MARDOVICH (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): More than a auarter of a century has passed since the adoption by the General Assembly, on the Soviet initiative, of the historic Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, which solemnly proclaimed the ·necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations· (resolution 1514 (XV». As a result of the powerful national liheration movement of the peoples of the world and the untiring efforts of the United Nations, scores of new sovereign States have risen from the rubble of former colonial possessions, embarked on the road of independent development and are now making an essential contribution to the solution of the burning issues of the day. (Mr. Mardovich, Byelorussian SSR) Against the background of the significant &nd impressive successes achieved in the struggle for the elimination of colonial slavery, it is i~creasing1y intolerable that at the same time vestises of that shameful phenomenon should remind us that the final goals proclaimed in the Declaration have not yet been achieved. Colonialism has still not been fully eliminated. Pockets of colonialism, racism and apartheid continue to poison the international atmosphere, ~epresent a dangerous source of tension and conflict and are a threat to international peace and security. The main preserve of colonialism, racism and its most obno~cious form, apartheid, continues to be southern Africa. The colonial racist regime of Pretoria c~ntinues flagrantly and highhanded1y to trample underfoot the inalienable right of the peoples of South Africa and Namibia to self-determination and their legitimate desire for freedom and independence. In an attempt to prolong their existence the racists. have elevated terrorism and violence against the indigenous African population to the level of State policy, resorting to mass arrests, brutal torture and coldblooded murder of members of the national liberation movements. Openly ignoring numerous United Nations decisions, the South African racist regime continues its colonial occupation of Namibia, exploiting its natural and human resources and trying to suppress the national liberation movement of the Namibian people, led by their sole and authentic representative, the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO). For many years now the racist Pretoria regime, directly and indirectly assisted by the United States of America and some other Western countries, not only has been thwarting the implementation of the united Nations decision on Namibian independence but is seeking to impose a neo-colonialist type of solution of the Namibian problem. (Mr. Mardovich, Byelorussian SSR) Foreign domination continues in a number of so-called small and Trust Territories situated in the oceans and adjacent areas. The world community has long b8en well aware of the main obstacles to the total and final elimination of the pockets of colonial domination in southern Africa and in Trust and dependent Territories. Numerous decisions of the United Nations, the non-aligned summit and other influential international forums have repeatedly and clearly stressed that one of the major reasons for the failure to implement decisions on decolonization issues is the stubborn opposition of the colonial Powers, first and foremost the united States and some of its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies, to any change in the status of Trust and dependent Territories solely because it is against their economic and military strategic ambitions, which are contrary to the united Nations Charter and United Nations resolutions on decolonization. (Mr. Maroovich, Byelorussian SSR) It is a well known fact that the colonial regime in those Territories provides monopolies of these countries with extremely favourable condi~ions for extracting ~rofits through the unimpeded plundering and depletion of non-renewable natural resources and the inhuman exploitation of the local population. On the other hand, economic, financial and other circles acting in complicity with the colonial r~imes are very actively carrying out the global policy of ildperialism aimed at turning colonial, Trust and dependent Territories into "military strongholds", "bridges" and ·springboards" in the vicinity of independent countries and continents. The interlinking interests of the imperialist Powers and racists and their economic, political, military, nuclear and other types of c~-operation remain major factors in determining the position of many western countries on the whole range of decolonization issues relating to southern Africa. This became very evident at the international conferences on sanction~ ~g'linst South Africa and on the immediate granting of independence to Namibia and ~t the fourteenth special session of the United Nations Gene~al Assembly on the question of Namibia held this year and in' the course of the discus~tons on the relevant items on the agenda of the current ses~ion of the General Assembly. For the imperialist monopolies the so-called small colonial and Trust Territories represent fertile soil for total domination. According to united Nations documents regarding the situation in these territories, foreign monopolies there control the utilization of natural and human resources almost totally in their own i~terests. They are concerned least of all with the destiny and well-being of the ,indigenous popul~tion, and all their "philanthropic activity" is guided by th~ desire to impede the growth of national self-awareness1 it thus creates obstacles to the implementation of the united Nations Declaration on decolonization. (Mr. Mardovich, Byelorussian SSR) Referring to t~e existence of certain· "specific" conditious,the small size of the Trust Territories, their low population and other so-called "objective factors", the administrating Powers are using. all the t gerage at their disposal to. thwart the objective process of decolonization of such territories and are trying to impose upon their populations and legalize new forms of cOlonial and semi-colonial dependence under the banner of "associationsN , "commonwealth" and various types of "integratIon". Of p.\rticular concern is the situation regarding the united Nations Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Micronesia), areated as a result of illegal action by ,he United States to partition this Territory and turn it into its military-strategic beach-head and a colonial appendage. Acting in violation of the United Nations Charter, the Trusteeship Agreement of 1947, the United Nations Declaration on decolonization, and other relevant decisions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, the uniteu States Administration continues to ignore its obligation to "promote the political, economic, social and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the Trust Territories, a~d their progressive development towards self-government or independence". In the course of almost four decades of administering this Territory the united States has deliberately slowed down its sceia-economic progress with the obvious aim of preventing the Micronesian people from moving towards independent development. In an attempt to tr~nsform Micronesia completely into one of its military-strat~·~c strongholds in the western Pacific, the United States has already established, and continues to establish, new missile test sites, naval bases, military airfields, facilities for stockpiling nuclear, chemical and other types of weapons of laass destruction, as well as other military facilities. (Mr. Mardovich, Byeloruseian SSR) Not only have the unlawful actions by the United States with regard to Micronesia imped~d the realization of the inalienable right of this people to genuine self-determination, freedom and independence, but'they present a serious threat to the security of adjacent States, as well as to international peace in general. They constitute open defiance of the united Nations. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR would like to stress once again that the ~westion of the future of Micronesia is pa~t of the general problem of decolonization, of the granting of the right of the colonial countries and peoples to self-determination and independence. Any change in the status of Micronesia as a Trust Territory under the united Nations Charter must take place only on the basis of a decision by the Security Council. unilateral actions by the administering Power with regard to the Trust Territory as a whole or to any part of it cannot be considered as legitimate or legally valid. The continuation of the colonial exploitation of small territories by imperialist monopolies and the use of these territories by administrative Powers as their military bases constitute an extremely serious impediment to the achievement of self-determination and independence by the peoples of those territories and to the attainment of the goals of the Declaration. The d~ployment of military bases in Guam, Puerto Rico, Micronesia, Diego Garcia, the Bermudas and the Turks and Caycos, as well as in their colonial and dependent territories, in no way serves to increase the level of employment of the indigenous population, as the colonialists claim. These bases are strongholds for the suppression of national liberation movements, preserving the military presence of the colonial Powers, in violation of the interests Of international peace and security. (Mr. Mardovich, Byelorussian SSR) As regards the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, a great deal has been done and considerable positive results have been achieved. In order to do away once and for- all with the shameful phenomena of the past, the United Nations must put forth fresh efforts to bring about the early and full implementation·of the final goals of decolonization in accordance with its historic resolution 1514 (XV), containing the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR sincerely hopes that the jus~ cause of the liberation of peoples from colonialism, oppression and racism will triumph. There is no doubt that an end will be put to the most shameful phenomenon of our time: apartheid in South Africa. The historic Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples must be fully implemented. The adoption by the General Assembly of the draft resolution contained in document A/41/L.36 can be a contribution to this end. For that reason the Byelorussian SSR became a sponsor of this draft resolution, which was submitted by a number of non-aligned and socialist countries. Mr. POSTOWICZ (Poland): Since the adoption of resolution 1514 (XV), on the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, some important changes have taken place. Several hundred million people have achieved freedom and have been enjoying its benefits. Several dozen new independent States have been born, which have been playing ever increasing and important roles in world affairs. Although colonialism has disintegrated as a system, the process of liquidating the vestiges of it has not yet been accomplished and, as we all know, the Declaration on decoloni~ation has not been fully implemented. There are still (Mr. Postowicz, Poland) peoples suffering uDder theeolonial yoke and 'racist domination in a number of small Territories in the Pacific and Atlantic OCeans, and in the Caribbean, not to mention the most striking example, that of Namibia. 'itley remir.~ u8 of the importance of the task' that still remains. to be done. (Mr. Postowicz, Poland) The question of Namibia represents a particular test of the international community's commitment to the decolonization process. In spite of universal support, the internationally accepted plan for the achievement of Namibia's independence remains a dead letter, because some Western Powers insist on linking its implementation to extraneous considerations, which the united Nations has always firmly repudiated. The situation in most of the 18 areas still on the list of dependent Territories does not give cause for much optimism. These Territories are still being mismanaged and exploited by the administering Powers, whose military and economic interests create an essential obstacle to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. The reports of the Special Committee on Decolonization show clearly that administering Powers negate the right to independence and freedom by imposing new forms of political and economic dependence. In the case of Micronesia, for example, the United States has used the Territory as a military ~ase to safeguard its strategic interests in the Pacific. The division of Micronesia into fpur parts and the imposition upon them of the neo-colonial status of commonwealth or association constitute a violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the 1947 Trusteeship Agreement and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and peoples. There is no mention in the Agreement of the possibility of the attainment of independe~ce by the people of Micronesia. on the other hand, the whole world is witnessing manoeuvres aimed at legalizing the annexation. As has been emphasized by petitioners appearing before the Special Committee of 24 and the FOurth Committee, the referendums staged in Micronesia did not reflect the true aspirations of the population, because the great majority of (Mr. postowicz, poland) voters had not been informed of what was at stake in the ballot. Attempts are also made to b--Jass the Security Council, which, under the Charter, is the only body that has the right to take a decision terminating the united Nations ~rusteeship Agreement. The principle of self-determination is indivisible. It cannot be selectively applied depending on a Territory·s geographical location or the size of its population. My delegation will suppor~ all me~sures by the united Nations to promote the genuine decolonization of the Territories and ~~?les so far deprived of their freedom and independence against their will and aspirations. It is imperative that more vigorous action be taken to eliminate colonialism and racism from the face of the earth. Ms. MAUALA (Samoa): The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and peoples is one of the great landmarks in the development of international law concerning Non-Self-Governing Territories. Together with resolution 1541 (XV) it lays down the principles and criteria by which the international community can judge whether a Territory is non-self-governing. Thanks in large part to the application of those principles and criteria, the membership of the united Nations has more than trebled from the original 51. Repr~sentatives of nearly 100 countries which, like my own, were once governed by distant Powers, now sit in this Hall as equal members of a coimmunity of sovereign independent States. That is an achievement - an enormous transformation of the political order - of which we can all be proud. But pride and reflection on past triumphs, however apt they may be, are not the reason why the Assembly takes up this item each year. It remains on our agenda because there is still unfinished business. There are countries and peoples not yet free whose aspirations demand our attention. Large and small, they are as much (Ms. Mauala, Samoa) entitled to benefit from the application of United Nations decolonization principles as those of us now proudly independent. Each year, through this item, we remind ourselves of their aspirations and struggles, and reaffirm the principles that guided us to self-government and independence. It is a necessary and salutary reminder. once having attained political freedom, many of us have moved on to grapple with other problems. Some of us have become immersed in difficult struggles for national political or economic survival. For good reasons, we find ourselves unable to pay as much attention as we should like to the situation in the remaining, mostly small and distant, Non-Self-Governing Territories. One of those Territories, New Caledonia, is in the same region of the world as Samoa - the South Pacific. The Permanent Representative of Fiji, on behalf of the seven States members of the South Pacific Forum which are Members of the United Nations, has already spoken of the situation in that Territory and of the conviction of Forum members that New Caledonia should be reinscribed on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Samoa fully endorses the position he set out in his statement. We do so because we believe in this Organization; we believe in the decolonization Declaration and in the principles of decolonization that have changed the political map of our region. We do so because Samoa's own national experience of decolonization under United Nations auspices encourages us to believe that a lasting solution to the admittedly complex situation in New Caledonia is more likely to emerge with United Nations involvement than without. We do so also because, regrettably, six years of patient Forum efforts to engage the administering Power in a dialogue about the future of New Caledonia have failed to lead to the quiet and constructive co-operation that is the hallmark of South Pacific regionalism. France claims to be of the South Pacific, but its approach to the problem of Ne~ Caledonia does not reflect a South Pacific consciousness. The Pacific way ls the path of dialogue, compromise and consensus. Those qualities are little evident in France's dealings with its Q~m SUbjects in New Caledonia or with the member Governments of the South Pacific Forum. Like all other Forum members, Samoa regrets that and wishes it were otherwise. (!'Is. Mauala, Samoa) It is a measure of that r(fJqret and of the goodwill that all Forum members feel towards France that we have chosen to act with such care and restraint i.n bdilging the auestion of New Caledonia to the Assembly. The proposal that we are bringing to the Assembly is a technical onei it contains no comments or judgements about France's policies or motives~ Our proposal is supported by a background paper (A/4l/668) circulated earlier in the session. That paper is dispassionate and objective. It gives a careful analytical survey of United Nations precedent and practice as they have developed over the years. It summarizes the points of principle and international la~ applicable to this case. The conclusions of this pa~r are the following: "In terms of the Charter and the Declaration on deColonization, New Caledonia is clearly a Non-Self-Governing Territory. Its decolonization must therefore be handled in accordance with the provisions of the Charter and the Declaration on decolonization. France, as the Administering Authority, has an obligation under Article 73 ~ of the Charter and the decolonization Declaration. The member countries of the South Pacific Forum consider that New Caledonia should therefore be reinscribed on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories and they appeal for the widest suppOrt for their call." (A/41/668, p. 10) That, in essence, is what our case is all about. Those conclusions are reflected in our proposal, together with a request to the Government of France to co-operate with ~he United Nations after reinscriptian. Even now, Forum Governments hope that the failures of dialogue at the regional level can be overcome in the interests of a solution on New Caledonia acceptable to all parties. Some delegations seem to think that New Caledonia raises new issues. It does not. It is a classic colonial'situation. It is not even new as far as France and the United Nations are concerned. The Assembly has been through it a11 before, 20 years ago, when it was last challenged by France cn the status of one of its overseas Territorles. The parallels are instructive. French Somaliland, too, had a complex demography and ·a dispute with France over its franchise. France argued that these matters were not within the competence of the united Nations. Nevertheless, in 1965, in its resolution 2105 (XX), the General Assembly reinscribed French Somaliland on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. France announced its intention to conduct a referendum in which the options of enhanced local autonomy or independence were to be offered and argued that there was no role for the United Nations to play. Nevertheless, in resolution 2228 (XXI) the General Assembly unambiguously and overwhelmingly claimed its legitimate role in overseeing developments in a Territory which France held to be a part of France. Eventually, and inevitably, compromises had to be made by France to recognize the legitimacy of the aspirations of the people of that Territory. The absolutism of the French position could not be maintained. In 1977 French Soma1iland chose independence, and now rightly sits among us as the Republic of Djibouti. Samoa and the other members of the South Pacific Forum, with which we are associated in this initiative, desire only that the Assembly assure the peoples of New Caledonia that it will similarly exercise the necessary oversight to ensure and guarantee their right to self-determination. The facts of the New Caledonian situation are clear and justify unequivocal support for the Forum position by all members of the Assembly. So, before I talk about the motives of the South Pacific Forum - since attempts have been made to sully them - let me dwell briefly on the basic facts of the case. New Caledonia is not an outer suburb of Paris~ it is an island group in the South Pacific whose governing power i3 20,000 kilometres away in Europe. We have seen that fact demonstrated ever so clearly in the last year. What had been negotiated with the poople of New Caledonia by the previous French Government, with its recognition and acceptance of the inevitability of the progress to independence, to be exercised in a form of continued association with FranC'~, was simply repudiated. The recognition given the indigenous people of New Caledonia, the Kanaks, as first occupants of the Territory and with an innate and active right to independence, was summarily rejected. It is not acceptable to my Government for commitments on a matter as important as decolonization to be entered into and then for the administering Power unilaterally to abrogate those cOmmitments to pursue a political philosophy whose origin and preconceptions in this case are European and not of the South Pacific. There is now to be a referendum - a referendum without the choices that had been negotiated with the people of the Territory through an extensive process of political compromise. It is a referendum which, it appears, will offer the suggestion of independence, but without any of the assurances of continued support and assistance from France that marked the promise of independence put 'forward by the previous French Government. If what we now understand will be the terms of the referendum are confirmed, it will not offer a real choice; certainly not when the French Minister responsible can say, as he did only la days ago, that independence can be ruled out for New Caledonia. The involvement of the United Nations to ensure that, the legitimate rights of the people of New Caledonia under the decolonization Declaration are respected is now needed. Like every regional organization, the South Pacific Forum is concerned with development in and affecting the peace and stability of its region. The South Pacific has been notably free of unrest and instability since it was a major theatre of the Second World War. The passage of former colonial Territories in the region to self-government and independence has been notab~y peaceful, with one exception - which, incidentally, also involved the Government of France. Administering Powers and their colonial Territories have worked together in haromy and mutual respect throughout the process. In many cases, as the representative of Fiji has noted, the- United Nations has made valuable and substantial contributions to the solution of specific difficulties, quite apart from its impor~ant role in assuring the international community that the principles it has laid down concerning the treatment of Non-Self-Governing Territories have been respected. Our only motive is to ensure the same opportunity for peaceful development for the people of New Caledonia. As long as there is no acknowledgement by France of the permanent realJty of the independencQJ movement, the peace and stability of New Caledonia, and thus of our whole region, are at risk~ for above all else in our considerations has been the fact that whatever the Government of France decides for New Caledonia will affect not only those resident in Rew Caledonia itself but all of us who live in the South Pacific. We have a legitimate regional concern to state here today. We have been fortu~ate in past years that the issues within in our region that • have occupied our attention have not usually required the involvement·of the United Nations to seek a just and principled solution. In fact, we have had the good fortune to stand in contrast to other regions in this respect. Our region does not have issues such as apartheid, Namibia or the rights of the Palestinian people, in which the continUed denial of basic rights calls into question the freedoms and rights of all in those regions and beyond. But within our region we have our concerns. The situation in New Caledonia Is one of them. We ask that the importance that this holds for us be acknowledged by all other regions. We,ask that our concern to prevent this issue becoming one with the potential to create le~tin9 tension and instability in our neighbourhood be supported. We ask all States to join with us in seeking the constructive involvement of the United Nations and we ask that its historic role in the decolonization process be reaffirmed. We are a region of small States. We base our case on the Charter of the United N~tions and the decolonization Declaration; on respect for principle and precedent. We cannot match appeals made from other quarters which ask to have Member States decide this issue on the basis of political allegiance or positions adopted on extraneous issues. They are irrelevant to Ne~ Caiedonia. We cannot threaten, cajole, or bully. It is a luxury not open to small island States. We cannot promise economic or pcJitical advantage in return for support in this case. And we would not do so even if we could. For the sf;rength of the appeal we make to the Assembly today must rest on the principles we seek to uphold. It will be a test of whether those principles remain valid today. Time and again we, the Member States of this Organization, have recommitted ourselves to uphold the decolonization Declaration. We ask'now that this be done again and that its validity be upheld in the case of New Caledonia. ~nd we ask it here in the General Assembly of the United Nations, the Hall where the interests of the small and the powerless are supposed to hold equal sway with the large and the powerfUl; where issues can be examined for the questions of principle they embody, and not be weighed in terms of the political might that a major Power can bring to the question. We bring the issue of New Caledonia to the Assembly in confidence that the continued involvement of the United Nations, in one of its most historic and succ~ssful roles, remains undiminished by time or extraneous political pressures. Mr. GARVALOV (Bulgaria): The question of granting independence tu colonial countries and peoples ~ontinues to attract the attention of the international community. And this is only natural and logical since colonialism, in all its forms and manifestations, is an anachronism. Although since the foundation of the united Nations more than 100 colonial and Non-Self-Governing Territories have succeeded in breaking out of the orbit of colonial domination, the realization of the sacred and inalienable right to freedom, self-determination and natioL': independence is still a dream for a number of peoples in southern Africa, the Pacific, the Indian and Atlantic OCeans, and the caribbean Basin~ These countries, Territories and peoples continue to be subject to callous and ruthless colonial exploitation and plunder. These colonial Territories have been transformed into a springboard for the military-political, economic and ideological expansion of imperialism and for the execution of its aggressive plans and schemes against sovereign countries and peoples. All this stokes up old hotbeds of tension and conflict and kindles new ones which worsen the international situation and pose a real threat to world peace and security. A series of United Nations decisions condemn colonialism, as such, and its dangerous conse~"'lces for international peace and security. As the historic Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, adopted 26 years ago - and I might add at the initiative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics - points out: "The SUbjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation." (resolution 1514 (XV), para. 1) (Mr. Garvalov, Bulgaria) The problem of survival and the new international realities regarding the zealization of national, regional and global interests require intensification of the efforts of the international community. The present-day realities require also. an entirely diiferent approach, new decisions and new thinking. A new approach and new decisions are nec~ssary in the field of decolonization as w~ll. Today, it is not enough only to adopt resolutions in support of peoples still under colonial rure. We fully support and sha~0 the idea that "our task is to reaffirm a new scale of priorities with an emphasis put on practical steps of States and to speed up the process of decolonizationw• We note with satisfaction that during the current forty-first session of the General Assembly a number of interesting suggestions and ideas were Pt'~ i"rward in this regard. We agree that the united Nations, the General Assembly the Security Council and the Special Committee on decolonization should pay more attention to decolonization matters. It is true that in the more than two decades since the Declaration on decolonization was adopted i~ 1960, more than 40 former Non-Self-Governing Territories have become inoependent. However, the total eradication of the last v)stiges of colonialism continues to be our goal. The peoples of almost 20 colonial and dependent Territories have not yet achieved independence. They continue to expect from the United Nations concrete and purposeful efforts to enable them to exercise fully and without delay their inalienable right to self-determination and independence. In spite of world public opinion and the relevant decisions of the united Nations, which has the sole legal administering authority over Namibia, the people of Namibia are still deprived of their inalienabie right to self-determination, freedom and independence. (Mr. Garvalov, Bulgaria) The racist regime of South Africa has' persisted in its campaign of terror through the constant harassment, detention, torture and cold-blooded murder of innocent people, the displacement of whole communities, and various other inhuman practices. Anyone suspected of being a member or supporter of the South West Africa people's Organization (SWAPO) is a prime target for these brutal attacks. The occupation regime has continued its militarization of Namibia, where it maintains over 100,000 soldiers and an ever-expanding number of military bases. It has continu(,·~j to recruit and use mercenaries to participate in genocidal violence, which it has unleashed in an attempt to break the spirit of the people of Namibia and the neighbouring African States. The main obstacle is the obstinate reluctance of the racist South African regime to comply with united Nations resolutions and its attempt to impose the so-called internal solution through the establishment of puppet institutions, such as the so-called provisional government proclaimed on 17 June 1985. This policy of South Africa shows the ambitions of Pretoria to impose an imperialist and neo-colonial settlement of the question of Namibia, in complete defiance of the . United Nations plan for Namibia contained in Security Council resolution 435 (1978), which constitutes the only basis for a lasting solution to the Namibian problem. The lack of progress in the implementation of the United Nations plan for granting independence to Namibia is also due to the discredited policy of constructive engagement with the South African regime and to the political, economic and military co-operation of certa~n Western States with that regime. This co-operation strengthens the South African regime, reinforces the predatory colonial exploitation of Namibia and impedes the granting of independence and freedom to its people. (Hr. Garvali)v, Bulgaria) As stressed in paragraph 41 of the Final DeclaE~tion adopted by the World Conference on Sanctions against Racist Sout~ Africa, which was held in Paris from . ., . 16 to 20 June 1986: •••• certain Western Powers and other Gove~nments and some transnational corporations, by. their active collaboration with the racist regime ••• have enabled that regime to build up its military and repressive apparatus ••• This has served to encourage that regime to pursue its disastrous course of attempting to perpetuate racist domination in South Africa and Namibia·. (A/4l/434, para. 41) There is no doubt that the people of Namibia, waging a heroic struggle under the leadership of SWAPO against the invaders, will sooner or later realize their inalienable right to freedom and national independence. My country, the People"s Republic of Bulgaria, proceeds from the understanding that the problems of decolonization are indivisible. For this reason, we devote serious attention also to the situation of the peoples of the smaller colonial territories, which according to the Declaration on decolonization are fully entitled to self-determination. The Declaration states that: "Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom." How is this provision of the Declaration being put into effect? Can we really say that the Administering Powers have complied with their obligations? (Mr. Garvalov, Bulgaria) As can be seen from the report of the'Speci~l Committee of 24, the process of decolonization has encountered serious impediments on the part of Administering Powe~s. Using new means and methods, these States have done all within their power to maintain the Territories in question under the rule of neo-colonialism, domination and dbpendence; A striking example of this policy are the recent events in Micronesia. On 3 November 1986, the United States announced that three parts of Micronesia - the Northern Mariana Islands, the.Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia - had received the status ~f what is called "Commonwealth" and "Association" with the united states. These actions are not only inconsistent with, but are in violation of the Charter of the united Nations, in particular its Articles 76 (a) and (b), the 1947 Trusteeship Agreement, and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. The primary goal of the united States policy towards Micronesia is to turn that strategically located United Nations Trust Territory into a military springboard in the Western Pacific, to ensure control over a large region of the globe and to dominate the States thereof. In contravention of its obligations under Article 76 Ca} of the united Nations Charter, which sets out as the main task of the T~usteeship System " ••• to further international peace and security", as well as of 'its Article 84, which states: "It shall be the duty of the administering authority to ensure that the trust territory shall play its part in the maintenance of international peace and security", the United States has forced the Micronesian islands of Palau to accept agreements that will permit the transit of nuclear weapons through the Trust ~lerritory, and port calls and landings of American vessels and aircraft carrying nuclear arms. According to reports in the American press, these agreements giv~ the Pentagon the opportunity to sture weapons of mass destruction on the islands. Rwajalein Atoll (Mr. Garvalov, Bulgaria) has been transformed into a huge testing range for intercontinental ballistic missiles. The militarization of Micronesia poses a serious risk to the security of Asia and the Pacific. That is why, together with the other socialist and peace-loving countries, the People's Republic of BUlgaria has resolutely opposed all attempts to perpetuate the neo-colonial status of Micronesia and its transformation into a springboard for the military-political expansionism of the unit~d States. The question of Micronesia1s future is an integral part of ·the problem of decolonization. The United Nations continues to bear responsibility for the Territory as long as the people of Micronesia are not granted the opportunity to exercise their legitimate right to self-determination and independence. The historic Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples is as topical now as ever. It will continue to be. topical until all the vestiges of colonialism are eliminated from the face of the Earth. The United Nations is duty-bound to do its utmost for t~e speedy achievement of this noble goal. Loyal to its consistent policy, the People1s RepUblic of BUlgaria will continue to give wholehearted support to the just struggle of the peoples against colonialism, neo-co10nia1ism, racism and apartheid. Mr. BUI XUAN NHAT (Viet Nam): On 14 December 1960, this international Organization adopted the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Peoples and Countries in its resolution 1514 (XV). This important Declaration came as a result of the powerfUl struggle waged by forces of socialism, national liberation and other progressive forces. Over the past 26 years, during the course of its development, the United Nations has adopted numerous import~nt documents with a view to speeding up the implementation of the resolution. A programme of action of full implementation of (Mr. Bui Xuan Nhat, Viet Nam) the Declaration was mapped out in commemoration of its 10th and, later, 20th anniversary. Every year resolutions, decisions and recommendations are adopted by the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Special Committee on the Situation with Regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, all directed to bringing about a speedy and unconditional end to colonialism in all its forms and manifestations. Those documents serve as legal, moral and political bases for all nations in their struggle for their right to self-determination and independence. Thanks to the solidarity and multifaceted support of all socialist and all peace-loving and jUEcice-loving forces, the struggle of colonial nations has been crowned with resounding victories that have shattered the old colonialism and plunged neo-colonialism deep into its new stage of serious crisis. As a result, hundreds of millions of persons in more than 70 countries, in Asia, Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean and the Atlantic Ocean, have gained political independence, and are embarking upon the path of economic independence. Those newly-independent nations have become members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, the Group of 77, and the united Nations, thus constituting an important force in shaping the world's destiny, in a struggle for the ~ommon goals of our modern times, namely peace, security, national independence, co-operation and development. (Mr. But Xuan Nhat c Viet Nam) Last year saw the significant coincidence of the fortieth a~niversary of the foundation of the United Nations with the twenty-fifth commemoration of the Declaration contained in resolution 1514 (XV). That offered a good opportunity to review what had been achieved and take the necessary steps with a view to the complete and speedy eradication of the last vestiges of colonialism. Important resolutions were adopted in which the right to self-determination and independence of all nations, irrespective of their territorial size, their geographical location, size of their population and the extent of their natural resources, was confirmed and reaffirmedJ the continuation of colonialism in all its forms and manifestations, including racism and apartheid, was condemned as a violation of the united Nations Charter and international lawJ the inalienable right of all nations to use all available means, including armed struggle, to liberate therns~lves was acknowledgedJ and appeals were made to the international community to strengthen its solidarity with and increase its material and moral support for all nations and their liberation movements. However, the imperialists and colonialists have so far turned deaf ears to those demands of the world community and, on the contrary, have continued obdurately to maintain their domination over Namibia and many other small Territories. The Heads of State or Government of non-aligned countries, at their Eighth Conference, held in Harare, the capital of Zimbabwe, "welcomed the gains made in implementing the Declaration [but] were disturbed that the colonial Powers continued to obstruct and impede the struggle for the complete elimination of colonialism in all its forms and manifestations". (A/4l/697, p. 121, para. 270) (Mr. Bui Xuan Nhat, Viet Nam) In Namibia, 20 years after the United Nations terminated South Africa's Mandate over the Terr.itory, Pretoria still continues its illegal occupation and its brutal repression of the Namibian people, uses the territory of Namibia to launch attacks against Angola and other front-line States and causes destabilization in other countries in the region. What we see in Namibia today is closely linked with what is happening in South Africa, where the South African people are languishing under the yoke of colonialism of the Pretoria ~egime and where innocent people are being made victims of the brutal regime of apartheid, which has been condemned by the international community as a crime against humanity. It is crystal clear that the racist regime in South Africa has been enabled to challenge the international community thanks only to the protection and collaboration of certain imperialist Powers whose policies are most clearly demonstrated by the so-called constructive engagement. Without such collusion South Africa could not continue to occupy Namibia and launch constant attacks against and cause destabi1ization in front-line countries, particularly Angola, Mozambique and Zimbabwe. An effective way to contribute to the early elimination of the racist regime would,be by the Security Council's adopting in the near future resolutions imposing comprehensive mandatory sanctions as provided for under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter against the apartheid regime of South Africa. The international community should strengthen its solidarity with and increase its multifaceted support for the liberation struggles of the South African people, under the leadership of the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC) and the Namibian people, under the leadership of the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO). The special appeal by the recent Eighth Conference of Heads of State or (Mr. Bui Xuan Nhat, Viet Nam) Government of Non-Aligned Countries and the important resolution of the fourteenth special session of the General Assembly, to name but two among countless efforts of this kind, were in that spirit. In complete agreement with that appeal and that resolution, the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam reaffirms its solidarity with the Namibian people in their struggle, strongly condemns Pretoria for its continued occupation of Namibia, condemns all attempts to link the problem of the independence of Namibia with the withdrawal of Cuban troops fron Angola, and demands immediate implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978;. Apart from South Africa and Namibia, colonialism still exists in many other parts of the world. On Western Sahara, the eighth summit Conference of non-aligned countries confirmed that the auestion constituted a problem of decolonization and can be solved only on the basis of ensuring for the people of Western Sahara conditions in which they can fully exercise their inalienable right to self-determination and independence, and demanded that the Kingdom of Morocco hold direct negotiations with the Government of the Saharan Arab Democratic Republic with a view to reaching an early, just and lasting solution to the problem. In the South Pacific, the New Caledonian people, whose representative is FLNKS (Kanak Socialist National Liberation Front), have been struggling to liberate themselves from the yoke of colonial domination. The Vietnamese people extend their total support to that patriotic struggle, and join with the members of the South Pacific Forum and many other countries in urging the reinscription of New Caledonia on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. To that end, Viet Nam decided to be a sponsor of draft resolution A/4l/L.33 and Corr.2. As for Micronesia, the administering Power has failed to fulfil its obligations as provided for in the United Nations Charter and is attempting to (Mr. Bui Xuan Nhat, Viet N~) divide and turn this Territory into a neo-colony by destroying the economic infrastructure and transforming it into a site for testing and stockpiling nuclear weapons. It is here, especially in Guam and other Territories, such as Puerto Rico and the Chagos Islands of Mauritius, that the United states has built huge military • complexes, with bases and installations, particularly the bases in Diego Garcia, to cause the destabilization of countries in the Tegions, thus seriously threatening world peace and security. In the face of those developments, it is imperative that the international community take firm measures to stay the hands of the imperialists and colonialists in their attempts to hinder the colonial peoples' exercise of their right to self-determination and indepencence, and thus to facilitate the speedy and full implementation of resolution 1514 (XV) and the complete eradication of all vestiges of colo~ialism. As a nation imbued with the teaching of our late President Ho Chi Minh that "Nothing is more precious that independence and freedom", and after so much sacrifice and hardship in our struggle for independence, the Vietnamese people vehemently condemn all attempts to delay the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. It is our conviction that the struggle fer national independence is a legitimate means of eliminating colonialism in its many forms and manifestations. Our hearts and minds are always with the nations struggling for their sacred, inalienable right to self-determination and national independence. We are firmly convinced that the great common cause of all nations is bound to be victorious. Mr. CESAR (Czechoslovakia): The successes achieved by our Organization in the field of decolonization are rightly noted ~[~ng the greatest and most important achievements made during its existence. The active moral and political support which the united Nations has been extending since its very foundation to the national liberation struggle of colonial and dependent nations has significantly cOhtributed to the major successes which have crowned that struggle. The States that have attained independence have resolutely set out on the road of independent political and social development. Their influence on world politics as well as on the shaping of the future of our planet in general has been growing from year to year. A milestone was set in decolonization activities of the ,United Nations by the adoption of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, the twenty-fifth anniversary of which we commemorated last year. The Declaration is rightly counteu among the most imPOrtant United Nations documents. In the conditions prevailing at the time of its QJoption it marked the beginning of the last stage of the existence of the politico-military system of colonial enslavement. Together with the united Nations Charter, the Declaration has formed, in terms of international law, a foundation for the elimination of the subjugation c and dependence of peoples subjected tn the colonial yoke. It has laid down an anti-colonial political programme which has become a basis for the unification of anti-colonial forces in the world-wide struggle for the exercise of the rights of all peoples to self-determination and independence. Yet despite the indisputable successes achieved by the United Nations in the deco1onization field the mandate given to' it by the Charter in this respect has not been fully discharged up to now and the completion of the process of emancipation of the subjugated nations still remains an urgent task of the United Nations and the entire international community. Although vast colonial empires have (Mr. Cesar, Czechoslovakia) disappeared, the struggle against colonialism has not yet been brought to a victorious end. The colonial map still shows a rather h~gh number of Territories suffering under colonialism and its innovated forms. It is therefore 'imperative for all United Nations Member States to join forces in order to eliminate colonialism in all its forms and manifestations. This year the united Nations has paid increased attention to some of the most significant colonial problems and the adverse effects ensuing theref~om, primarily when holding special sessions of the General Assembly on the critical economic situation in Africa and on Namibia. The special session of the General Assembly on Namibia, forming a thematic unit with the international conferences held this year in Paris and Vienna, has highlighted the key problems that still prevent the Namibians from exercising freely their right to self-determination in accordance with the United Nations Charter and other decisions of our Organization. They include primarily the illegal occupation of ,Namibia by South African troops, the predatory'economic interests of some Western count~ies trying to exploit to the maximum extent possible its imme~se natural resources and the attempts to impose upon the Namibian people a neo-colonialist settlement. We therefore have to state this year again, much to our regret, that despite the intensive efforts of the international community and the courageous struggle of the Namibian people for national liberation Namibia is still not free. The Pretoria regime can continue to maintain Namibia under its colonial yoke due to the support and assistance it has been receiving from its closest allies, the United States and some other Western States that have been If~peatedly blocking the adoption by the Security Council of mandatory economic sanctions that would constitute the most effective step towards the elimination of colonialism, racism and apartheid in southern Africa. (Mr. Cesar, Czechoslovakia) The Namibian people expect from the United Nations, and with good reason, immediate and effective assistance in their efforts to attain their inalienable right to self-determination and independence. We therefore strongly demand the immediate termination of the South African colonial domination over that country and the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) as well as of resolutions adopted by the General Assembly in this ~espect. During the deliberations in the Fourth Committee as well as here in the Assembly a number of delegations have voiced grave concern about the situation in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands in the light of the fact that the United States has misused its Mandate as administering Power of that Territory. Ever since it began to administer the Pacific Islands it has been striving to strengthen the economic dependence of this Tcust Territory and using the Island.l for the advancement of its own military-strategic interests. Now we are witnessing escalating efforts by 'the United States Government to exclude Micronesia from the trusteeship system and to achieve the legalization of its direct annexation, masked under the guise of ineauitable agreements on a so-called free association imposed upon the artificial State entities into which it has divided the Pacific Islands. At the fifty-third session of the Trusteeship Council it succeeded in getting through, in contravention of the United Nations Charter, a recommendation to termin~te the Trusteeship Agreement on Micronesia. In this connection the Czechoslovak Socialist RepUblic wishes to emphasize that, according 'to Article 83 of the Charter, all functions of the United Nations relating to strategic areas, inclUding th~ termination of trusteeship agreements or their possible amendment or modification, are to be exercised by the Security Council. Any changes in the status of Micronesia, which undoubtedly is a strategic Territory, can thus be made only by the Security Council. (Mr. Cesar, Czechoslovakia) Although our attention is focused on the situation in Namibia and in the Pacific Islands, we should not'forget Puerto Rico and other so-called small Non-Self-Governing Territories. The deliberations of the deColonization organs of the United Nations have shown that manifestations of colonialism still persist in those Territories ~nd that some of those areas are being misused for military • purposes, posing a direct threat to international peace and security. What we regard as particularly dangerous is the nuclear militarization of th~ dependent territories and their graaual integration into Star Wars concepts. (Mr. Cesar, Czechoslovakia) In addition to their military importance, the Non-Self-Governing Territories, though small in size, produce substantial economie profits which go to transnational corporations. This is made possible by the availahility of au inexpensive labour force recruited from the native population and by access to natural resources in those Territories. Income from new branches of the economy, such as tourism, trade or finance, has been rising, yet the population of the dependent Territories gets no benefit whatsoever from any of this. Completion of the decolonization process is impossible without the attainment of economic independence. The peoples of the Territories in auestion have to liherate themselves from colonial structures in the economic sphere as well as in the fields of culture, education and information. The deliberations at the forty-first session of the General Assembly of the united Nations have demonstra~en that the Declaration on decolonization and the ensuing programme decisions of the United Nations are still topical. Our task is to transfer their content into the sphere of practical measures that would undoubtedly be conducive to an overall improvement in international relations. We consider it important to recall in this connection the Programme of Action on decolonization which states that the subjection of nations to foreign domination constitutes a serious obstacle to the maintenance of international peace and security and to the development of peaceful relations among nations. The practical logic of that fundamental united Nations document is in harmony w1th the proposals formulated at the session of the Political Consultative Committee of the Warsaw Treaty member Sta~es held last June with a view to establishing a comprehensive system of international peace and security. Czechoslovakia feels solidarity with the nations struggling for their freedom and independence. Successful completion of the decolonization process is regarded (Mr. Cesar, Czechoslovakia) by us as one of the most important tasks of the present time. That is why we have been actively participating in" the work of the decolonization Committee and have sponsored several draft resolutions on decolonization. Mr.OLZVOY (Mongolia): The General Assembly is once again seized of the auestion of the implementation of the Declafation on the Grantinq of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. The historic significance of the Declaration has been widely recognized. Its elaboration and adoption in 1960 at the initiative of the ~JSSR became a turning point in the efforts of our Organization to eradicate colonialism in all ita forms and manifestations. Today the Declaration continues to serve as a powerful stimulus to the struggle of colonial and dependent peoples for self-determination and independence. Indeed, since 1960 more than 50 countries with a population of millions have achieved their independence ~~~ joined our Organization as fully-f~edged Members. Colonialism as a system has collapsed. However, we have once again to underline the validity and importance of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, in which stress was laid on: "the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations· (resolution 1514 (XV». The urgency of the question of decolonization stems from the fact that colonial vestiges still continue to exist in different parts of the world. It is a very dangerous tendency of the current colonial policy of certain imperialist Powers that they do not only intend to preserve those Territories under the colonial yoke; but also seek to turn them into an object of their military and strategic interest. The responsibility of the Members of this body is, therefore, to act decisively for the speedy and unconditional implementation of the provisions of the above-mentioned historic Declaration. Moreover, it is the Charter of the United Nations that urges all States to achieve through their joint efforts the total and complete eradication of colonialism, racism and apartheid from the face of the earth. After these remarks of a general nature, I shall dwell on .certain specific questions pertinent to the item under discussion. The most disturbing colonial issue at present remains the auestion of Namibia. Despite world-wide condemnation and demands, the racist regime of south Africa does not only persist in its illegal occupation of the international Territory of Namibia, but also continues to spread its obnoxious policy of apartheid to that country. The South African regime also perpetrates further crimes by launching acts of aggression against neighbouring independent African countries. One cannot but point out that it is the overt and covert assistance and support of certain Western Powers which enables the Pretoria regime to exist and also encourages it to commit thos~ criminal a~ts. In this connection, the Mongolian delegation once again condemns the Pretoria regime and demands that an immediate end be put to its colonial and apartheid policy and to its acts of aggression against neighbouring independent states. We also demand that the Western Powers, and first of all the United States, halt their collaboration with the Pretoria regime without any further delay and thus fulfil their international obligations. The Mongolian delegation also maintains that it is long overdue for the Security Council to apply comprehensive mandatory sanctions against the racist regime of South Africa. Likewise we consider it very important for the international community to continue to render every possible assistance to and support for the indigenous Namibian people and their national liberation movement, the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO). Pull implementation of all the decisions adopted et the International Conference fo~ the Immediate Independence of Namibia held recently in Vienna and at the special sessio~ o£ the General Assembly convened in September this year will undoubtedly help to boost the efforts of the international community to put an end to the illegal occupation of Namibia by South Africa and speed up the granting of independence to Namibia in accordance with the relevant united Nations resolutions. . ,1. (Mr. Olzvoy, Mongolia) There are other territories and Peoples sUffering from the evils'of ' coionialism. Micronesia, the Malvinas, Puerto 'Rico and others still-remain on the long list of dependent territories. All the progressive peoples of the world are particularly concerned ove~ the present situation of Micronesia, a united Nations Trust Territory. The events which took'piace most recently clearly testify to the very urgent and serious nature of the question. As all representatives may recall, 'at the beginning of November 1986, the United States administration arbitrarily announced that three parts of the Territory, namely, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia, were being given the status of so-called Commonwealth and association with the united States. The decision of the administering Power to change the status of united Nations Trust Territories, by-passing the United Nations, particularly the Security Council, should be characterized as illegal and, therefore, declared null and void. I need hardly mention that, in accordance with Article 83 of the United Nations Charter, any change in the status of strategic Trust Territories, like Micronesia, can be carried out only by Security Council decisions. Our Organization and its Member States are, therefore, duty bound not to allow the perpetuation by the United States of its colonial domination over Micronesia. Moreover, the administering Power is harbou~ing a plan to deploy nuclear weapons in those Territories, as reported in the world press. Such a neo-colonialist policy of the United States Government towards Micronesia poses a serious threat to peace and security in the world and, in particular, in A~ia and the Pacific. The turning of Micronesia into a testing ground of nuclear and other weapons is also a clear violation of the provisions of the United Nations Charter, Article 84 in particular. Representing an Asian country, the Mongolian delegation condemns these actions and ~alls upon the administering Power immediately to grant ,independence and freedom to Micronesia in accordance with the united Nations Declaration on decolonization. Mongolia fUlly supports the desire of the Palauan people to be independent and not to allow their territory to be used as a base for the deployment and storage of nuclear weapons. We consider the so-called ne~ plebiscite to be held in Palau on 2 December 1986 as a part and parcel of its policy of annexion and as a new manoeuvre of the administering Power designed to impose its colonial will upon the people of that Trust Territory. While supporting the right of Micronesia to freedom and independence, my delegation also joins the other delegations that strongly oppose the use of any colonial territory for military purposes. In this context, we submit that all the remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories, inclUding Micronesia, Guam, Puerto Rico, Diego Garcia, the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands, and the others, must be demilitarized and decolonized without any further delay. Another important point which I would like to highlight is the merciless exploit~tion and depletion by the administering Powers and foreign transnational corporations of the human and natural resources of the colonial countries. It is again common knowledge that many western countries and their transnational corporations operate in Namibia and other colonial countries and obtain huge profits from their investments in those territories. In this connexion, my delegation calls upon the Western countries to take strict measures designed to halt the exploitation by their nationals and companies of the resources of the Non-Self-Governing Territories. In the light of all the aforementioned, Mongolia fully shares the view of the non-aligned countries which, at their Eighth Summit Conference held in Harare, firmly condeaned both t~e increasing exploitation of the resources of the colonial territories and the use of some of those resources for military purposes. Taking this opportunity, my delegation wishes also to stre~s the important role which the United Nations and its Special Committee of 24 have played and continue to play in the decolonization process. We are especially happy to note that, during the period since the last united Nations General Assembly session, the Special Committee of 24, under the able leadership of Mr. Oscar Oramas-Oliva of Cuba, has done much by adopting many important decisions. We hope that these decisions, as well as the recommendations made by the Special Committee of 24 in its report, will be duly reflected in further General Assembly resolutions and be fully implemented. Mr. de KEMOULARIA (France) (interpretation from French): I have listened with great attention to those o~ my colleague~ who have chosen to raise the auestion of New Caledonia during this debate. Most of them represent member countries of the South Pacific Forum which took the initiat~ve of asking the General Assembly t~ include New Caledonia on the list of Territories falling under Article 73 of the Charter. This initiative is unjustifiable, highly troubling and, lastly, surprising. It is mjustifiable. The French delegation has already sent to all the missims ooncerned a memorandum prOl1iding clear and exhaustive informatioo on this French Territory and setting out in detail the position of its GoI1ernment. I shall merely recall a few fundamental points ir. order to shQtl the groundless nature of this request and to demonstrate its true significance in lIlhat is a highly Wlusual r egi00al oontext • Cootrary to what the representative of Fij.i said this morning the memorandum of the French Gcwernment has already answered in detail the mistaken legal argumants put forward by the sponscxs of the draft resolution. I shall go straight to the heart of the prcblem and speak plainly. ~at exactly do the Forum countries really say? They claim that New Caledonia is a Non-Self-Governing Territory and that it therefoce comes under the responsibility of the tl'1ited Nations. I say to the General Assembly that those assertioos are false. What are the facts? It is true, that New Caledooia is in the Pacific, far from the European territory of France. It is also true that history has brought together there popula tions of different origins. Today that mol tiracial society is made up of Melanesians, Europeans, Polynesians and Asians, who have to live together and get on wi th each other. Blt even if ooe reasons on the grounds chosen by the sponsors of the draft resolution and stretches to the limit the criteria laid down in resolution 1541 (XV), in no way can New Caledooia be considered a Non-Self-Gover ning Territory. All New Caleoonians are French ci thens who, regardless of their or: igin, enjoy fully the rights and freedoms attached to that status. As such, they elect the President of the Republic, participate in all national and local elections and have the same repr$entation in Parliament as all the other ci tizens of my country. Thus New CaledCX\ia is fUlly integrated in the unity of France, but it has a wide degree of autonoD¥. At the local level, the Ter~itory is administered by freely and dellOcrGtically elected assen'blies. There are four regional councils whose members, the leg! timate representatives of New Caledonia, make up the congress of the Territory. That cCX\gress is an assel'lbly of 46 memers, many of whom at the present time are Melanesians representing all political tendencies. The President of the assel'lbly is himself a Melanesian, Mr. Dick Ukeiwe, whOlli orne delegations met· during his recent stay in New Yor k. Let us be quite clear about this. If the Caledonians no lCX\ger want to be French, they have both the right and the possibilities so to determine, but it is for them, and them alCX\e, to make the decisiCX\. Their representative assembly could, if it wished, ask for independence, but it has not dCX\e so. The elected majorities have never chosen to do so. In view of this, by what right and under what pretext are the countries of the south Pacific Forum now raising the issue in the United Nations? There are str iking differences between the situation in New Caledonia and the painful historical case whic::h the representative of Australia saw fit to raiae this morning, knowing full well that only by forgetting the origins of his country could he do so. It must be stressed that what those countr ies want is not so muc::h self-determination as independence, even if the majority of New Caledonians do not desir~ independence. France does not exclude independence, but it cannot agree to be party to such a distortion of the principle of self-determination. I ask all countries Which, like mine, are attached to this principle, to consider this aspect of the matter carefully. U1derlying the seemingly innocuous draft resolution there is an emorbitant demand. The Forum countries are in fact expecting that through inscription of New Caledmia on the list the tl'lited Nations will p,lt pressure on the French Government to organize a slanted referendum whose outcome would be determined in advance. It is true that there is a group in New Caledonia in favour of independence, principally wi th in the Melanes ian commtmity, but also including some Europeans. In that regard, I stress the total freec:bm of action that the supporters of that idea have. They enjoy the same rights and freedoms as other French people. Have there ever been at the United Natioos genuine liberation movements which have been guaranteed freedom of expression and assenbly and freedom to demonstrate by the law they are opposing? Have there ever been any such roovements with their own newspapers, radio stations and legally established trade tmions? Are people aware that the representatives of the independence group move quite freely inside and outside the Terri tory, that they make all sorts of contacts abroad, including those made within the corridors of the United Nations? Are people aware that these representatives can take part in all national and local elections and, when they are elected, are paid a p,l.,lic salary? The independence party, FINKS, received 28 per cent of the vote - just aver a quarter - in the elections of Septenber 1985 and its leaders are represented in the institutions of the Territory. The leaders of that party, like those of other political groups, are naturally among the interlcc:utors of my Government. But they cannot claim, any more than can any other group, the right to determine the destiny of all. That destiny can be decided ooly by the str ict application of the pr inciple of self-determination, which constitutes me of the ftmdamental rules of our Organization and of French policy and which my Government is coJ'lltlitted to implement in New Caledonia as it has elsewhere in the past. consequently, the French Parliament has decided to organize a referendum - contrary to what the Australian (Mr. de Kemoularia, France) representative has said. The law enacted by Parliament last July prOl7ides that the question asked must be a choice between two perfectly clear alternatives: on the one hand complete independence and on the other increased autCllany. Obviously, there is no question of allowing temporary visitors to vote, much less of bringing in last-minute voters, as has been rumoured by the sponsocs of the draft resolution. Through consultation with all the political parties, inclUding the propcnents of independence, the electcxal college will be constituted in such a way that the result of the ballot will reflect the wishes of the people of New Caledonia that will be truly affected by it. This referendum will be held in the sUJII'Der of 1987 at the latest, in accordance wi th the law tha t has been pa~sed, and I can ass ure the AsSenbly that, whatever the outcome, it will be scrupulously respected by my Gaver nrnent. As I have said, the initiative of the Forum countries is also highly troubling. It is of the utmost importance that that referendum should take place calmly and in accordance with dellDcratic principles, which my country upholds. (Mr. de Kemoularia, France) Thus, outside interference could only disrupt the process, create tensions and thereby prevent the population of New Caledonia from deciding freely on the clear choice before it - and the fairness of this choice will be easily verifiable by anyone on the scene as well as by others. I repeat, in a word, that France will accept independence if that is the choice of the majority of'New caledonians. That is why I ask members not to prejudge by their votes the decision to be taken in a few months by the inhabitants of New caledonia. At the beginning of this statement, I said that, lastly, the initiati~e of the Forum countries was surprising. Surprising indeed is the haste that these countries have shown. Since they referred the issue to the COmmittee on Decolonization last August, why do they not wait for the conclusions of the Committee, which has decided to consider the question at its next s~ssion? This morning,the representative of Australia actually replied to that question by clearly expressing distrust of my Government's intentions. On what grounds, and by what right? How can we not see in that an expression of a hostile attitude towards F~ance and its presence in the South Pacific, in spite of the denials and the declared assurances to the contrary? IS it not surprising to find the signatures of Australia and New Zealand on the draft resolution that has been submitted and at the end of certain communiques? Australia did not vote in favour of resolutions 1514 (XV) and 1541 (XV), the application of which to a French Territory it is now demanding. Are we to understand that what is not good for that country can be excellent for other countries? This is what is commonly known as "double standards". That is true also of New Zealand, whose present policy is in contrast to its past positions. It did not, for instance, vote in favour of resolution 1541 (XV). (Mr. de Kemoularia, France) That does not prevent it from calling strongly now for. the implementation of that resolution in New Caledonia. Is it not paradoxical to see those two countries now giving lessons - without any inhibitions - on how to administer a multiracial society? Australia and New Zealand cannot really serve as an example on that score. I" do not intend to dwell on a carefully concealed but particularly distressing past. Everyone should, however, remember the way in which the aborigines of Australia, in particular, were treated. Did not those populations, now only a small minority, have some legitimate rights that should have been recognized? In any event, the current situation of those native populations is far from satisfactory. Australia and New Zealand'would do better to deal seriously, at last, with "their own problems before trying to impose on others a solution they have not considered applicable to themselves in the past.* The same remark is valid for Indonesia, which deems it appropriate to support the draft resolution in spite of the fact that the people of East Timor have been unable to exercise their right to self-determination. It is less ~urprising to see the three Melanesian countries co-sponsoring the draft resolution. It is understandable that they feel spontaneously attached to the Melanesians of New caledonia. But they should not limit their solidarity to those groups supporting independence and refuse to take into account the complex nature of the Territory. They restrict themselves to a simplistic formula: Kanak independence to be decided by Kanaks alone - in other words, by a minority of the population which, by the way, would be very difficult to identify, because of the high rate of mixed marriages and the ~acial intermingling. They take no account of *Mr. Knipping Victoria (Dominican Republic), Vice-President, took the Chair. (Mr. de Kemoularia, France) intermingling. They icake no account of the rights and interests of the majority and actually advocate the unprecedented application of a novel principle: "two men, one vote". Certain spokesmen of the Melanesian countries, aware 'of the anti-democratic and fanciful nature of that position, envisage that the right to vote would be extended only to those non-Melanesians who had lived in the Territory for three or more generations. If that were applied to the United States or to Australia, for instance, there would be very few Americans or Australians left with the right to vote. Neither France nor the united Nations can for one moment set fo~t on this dangerous ground, which could in the future open the way to all sorts of excesses throughout the world. Is there anyone in this Hall who is not outraged by the application of such a principle to the distressing situation reigning in South Africa, where, on the basis of racial discrimination, a minority deprives the majority of its rights? I ~m disappointed to see that chese Melanesian countries with which we hope to develop friendly relations are taking France to ta~~ while at the same time accepting situations which should be of primary concern to them. I note, for example, that the leaders of Papua New Guinea are showing inordinate concern for their cousins in New Caledonia but have little to say about the misfortunes of their brothers right on the border of the country, on the island of Papua itself. That policy of a double standard, just like the haste we are witnessing, should lead us to auestion the real motives of the co-sponsors of the draft resolution. Is not their aim, in actual fact, to distort the democratic nature of the process undertaken by France? As for the intentions of France, they are clear. its policy is based on the principle of self-determination. Faithful to its tradition, my country is offering the population of New Caledonia the opportunity to decide its future for itself. I appeal to the members of the General Assembly not to do anything to hinder this act of self-determination and prevent democracy from taking its free course. That is why France today asks members to refuse to support draft resolution A/41/L.33, which is now before them. Mr. KEOLA (Lao People's Democratic Republic) (interpretation from Frent"h): The process of de(.~olonization is one of the most characteristic features of international relations in the second half of the twentieth century. The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and peoples, adopted in 1960 by the General Assembly, has been a powerful stimulus to, and has served as a legal, political and moral foundation for, the struggle of peoples for freedom and independence. Since the adoption of that historic Declaration, and thanks to the courageous and stubborn struggle of the oppressed peoples of the world, many former colonial, trust and non-self-governing Territories have acceded to independence and self-determination. Hundreds of millions of persons have thus thrown off the colonial yoke. None the less, the remarkable success achieved in the implementation of the Declaration on decolonization should not make us complacent, because this process is still far from completed. SOme peoples, speci fically. those in sou thern Africa, the Indian OCean, the Pacific, the Caribbean and the SOuth Atlantic, are still under colcnial domination•. Indeed, it is shocking that as we appcoach the twenty-first century those Territories are still in an anadlrcnistic colalial status passed on from a bygooe age. FurthermOl:e, those which have achievea independence are far from having rid themselves of neo-colalial domination, with the colalialists and impf;:! ialists seeking to regain their lost positions. Obstacles to the process of deoolonization are identifiable and have been identified. They are the military and strategic interests of the colcnial Powers which do not wish to give up cer ta in Non-Se1 f-Gover ning Ter ritor ies of enormous strategic importance. This is explained by the fact that those Territories are located at nerve centres of the world which control one or more international shipping lanes. In view of their importance, colooial and imperialist administering POlrIers have often built or plan to build military bases there. The process of decolooiza tion is further hampered by the eccnomic and financial interests of the administering Powers and their allies represented by their mooopolies or transnatialal corporations. Those mooopolies, which have i.!wested much capital in low-cost exploitation of the natural and hu~n res,ources of the colalial territories, wish only to make huge profits and transfer them back home to the detr iment of the interests of the indigenous inhabitants. To protect their selfish interests the colonial and administering powers are stUbbornly refusing to cede power to the oppressed peoples. What is more, in some cases they are even trying to annex Trust and Non-Self-Gcwerning Territories by resorting to var ious procedural ploys so as to use those territor ies for military purposes in the service of their aggressive policies, in flagrant violation of the United Na tions Charter, the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, and the elementary norms of centempcxary international law. The cases of MiCi:enesia, Puerto Rico, New Caledonia and others regions of the world are particularly revealing in this regard. Our delegatien fully supports the draft resolution on New Caledonia which is nCM before the General Assembly. In the case of Micrmesia the administering Power has not disdlarged the obligation inculIbent upon it under Article 76 (a) of the Charter, namely, -to further international peace and securi-ty-. It is in the process of trying to convert the Territory into a strategic n&\'JAJ. air base, a missile testing ground, and a site for stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. That is a threat to the people of the Territory and to the region. My delegation believes that formulations sum as union and free association are pcetexts designed to link the islands of Micronesia to the {hi ted states and depc ive the indigenous inhabitants of genuine independence and self-determinatioo. Micronesia is a strategic territory, therefore any change or IlOdification of its status falls exclusively within the competence of the United Nations security Council. The consolidation of united States military bases and those of some of their allies in the North Atlantic Treaty organization (NA'ro) in Asia, the Pacific and all over the world constitutes a serious threat to the peace and security of all mankind. As regards the problems of Namibia and Palestine, the Unite"! Nations and the international community have spared no effort to find a peaceful, just and lasting solutioo, so that the Namibian and Palestinian peoples may freely enjoy their fundamental national rights. we unreservedly support all the relE!l1ant resolutions and decis iens of the General Assembly and the secur i ty Council condemning the racist and Ziooist policies of Pretoria and Tel Aviv wi th regard to those peoples. (Mt;. Keola, Lao People's Democratic Republic) The implementation of the ,Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colooial Countries and Peoples is closely linked to the struggle of all peoples of the wcxld for peace and an imprmed international climate. At present there is an overriding need for all peaoe-10l7ing peoples throughout the world to sUpPOrt actively the peoples of Asia, Africa and Iatin America in their just struggle to saeeguard their political and economic sOlTereignty, for peace, democracy, justice and social progress. In particular, vigcxous support must be given to those peoples fighting heroically to put an end to colooialism in all its forms. In his poll tical report to the FOurth Congress of the Lao People's Revolutionary Party last month, our secretary-Genera~ Kaysooe Pholl'flihane emphasized~ "The natiooal liberation movement has brought about the collapse of colonialism~ but, by engaging in various manoeuvres, imperialism has created a more sophisticated system of neo-colooialist exploitation closely linking to itSelf a number of newly independent countries. The contradictions between the imperialist cqpr1tries and those which have just attained independence are increasin~ly sharp. This cruel, sophisticated neo-colonialist policy of exploi tation and the enormous debt of moce than Sl,OOO billion which the developing countr ies are forced to repay have created numeltous s.ocial and ec~omic difficulties for the latter. In the circuJ\Stances~ the developing countries have no choice but to strengthen their solidarity and fight resolutely against neo-colooialism, defend political independence, win economic independence and demand the establishment of a new international economic order." (Hr. Keola r Lao peoge's Demcratic Re~ubllc Consequently r the policies of colCXlialism r neo""ColQlialismr interference and aggressiCXl pursued by imperialism everywhere in the world constitute a serious threat to international peace and security. The international community must make every effort to accelerate the attainment of true independence by the peoples in the colonial and Trust Territories throughout the wOdd r in keepin'j with the relevant resolutions of the General Assenbly and the security Council. Consistent with the foreign policy defined at the Fourth Congress of the Lao People's Revolutionary Partyr the Lao People's Democratic R:!public is oomnitted to the international commmity's fight to achieve peace r end the arms racer prevent nuclear war r for international detente r fr iendship and co-operatioo on the basis of Peaceful coexistence and I1Ut~al adITantage. This struggle is inseparable from the just struggle of the colonial peoples of the world for self-determination and the safeguarding their indePendence and national sOl7ereignty. The concerted action of all peace and freedom-1OYing peoples is a matter of urgency; it should take the form not only of words but also of coocrete acts. The Lao peopler having itself exper ienced the yoke of colooialism and neo-colooialism and having been the victim of a loog imperialist war of aggression, will spare no effort to contr ibute to the couplete emd definitive implementation of the neclaration on the Grar£ting of Independence to Colooial Countries and Peoples. Mr. OUDOVENKO (Ukrainian soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian): The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples is among the most important documents adopted by the United Nations. It has played an important role in the emergence on the map of the world of many scores of independent States and it will remain as relevant as ever until such time as all the peoples of our planet, without exceptidn, have achieved ~enuine independence. A little more than two months ago there was a special session of the General Assembly on Namibia. Once again serious alarm was expressed by the international community about the unresolved state of the Namibian problem. Twenty years ago the United Nations assumed total responsibility for the future of Namibia and for its early achievement of independence. Ever since then great efforts have been made to resolve this problem. It has appeared at times that a Namibian settlement was in sight and that the plan for granting its independence, prepared in accordance with united Nations decisions, would be implemented. However, the racist South African regime, with the connivance of certain Western countries, was able, and is still able to this very day, to sabotage this programme. The freeing of Namibia from colonial oppression remains one of the most urgent problems of decolonization. If it is to be resolved at an early date. there must be united action on the part of the broadest strata of the world commu~ity, the non-aligned countries, inclUding the African countries, and all those who really cherish the ideals of freedom, independence and equality. Only by our united efforts can we force Pretoria and its foreign protectors to give up their illegal claims to Namibia and to its natural and human resources. The Ukrainian SSR vigorously condemns the policy of "constructive engagement", or any other kind of co-operation with the racist Pretoria regime, which is what (Mr. OUdovenko, Ukrainian SSR) actually enables it - as demonstrated by the repeated votes in the Security Council on this subject - to maintain its illegal occupation of Namibia. We wholeheartedly support the appeal of the African countries, the Non-Aligned Movement and the General Assembly to the Security Council to adopt comprehensive and binding sanctions against the South African regime. The independence of Namibia, and true independence at that, must be granted immediately, without any of those notorious linkages with extraneous matters. NO political machinations with regard to a so-called internal settlement or interim government must be allowed to take the place of a just Namibian settlement. Power in a united Namibia, with its territorial integrity intact, must be handed over in its entirety to the people of Namibia, through its sole legitimate representative, the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO). An urgent situation has arisen in another reg!on, the united Nations Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. The United States, which has been openly pursuing a policy of neo-colonialism, has been abusing the United Nations Mandate and has been forcibly turning the United Nations Trusteeship Mandate over Micronesia into a de facto annexation. Washington is attemptin~ to resolve the question of the future of the population of the Islands in disregard of' the provisions of the united Nations Charter, the Trusteeship Agreement and the Declaration on decolonization. ThUS, paragraph 4 of the decolonization Declaration refers directly to the need to respect the integrity of national territories, and paragraph 6 stresses 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." The Administering Authority, to make it easier to swallow up Micronesia, has attempted to dismember the single Trust Territory into four separate parts. It has (Mr. Oudo7enko, Ukrainian SSR) exerted massive pressure on them, and has resorted to staging all kinds of plebiscites and referendums which have absolutely no connection with the true and free expression of the will of the people of Micronesia. The United states has been stubbornly imposing on these Territories the neo-colonial status of "free association" or "commonwealth", and they are trying to involve the Trusteeship • COuncil of the United Nations in this political farce of a plebiscite. Illegal decisions have been taken with regard to the status of the strategic .Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, which is in violation of Article 83 of the Ch~rter. Only the ~ecurity Council is empowered to carry out all the functions of the United Nations in connection with strategic areas, including the approval of the terms of the trusteeship agreements, ana of their alteration or amendment. Press reports and statements of petitioners in the Trusteeship Council have all revealed the very slow pace of the economic development of the Islands, the poorly 9rganized health services, the fact that children are not receiving a proper education, that there is no proper highway system in the Islands, and that there are not enough hospitals, schools or industries. The almost 40 year period of trusteeship over Micronesia has had a very bad effect on the life of the people of the Islands, exemplified by the Administering Authority's failure to comply with its obligations under Article 76 ~ of the Charter. "To promote the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the trust territories, and their progressive development towards self-government or independence ••• ". Lastly, the United States is counting on the ultimate annexation of this United Nations Trust Territory, and on turning it into an American military base. Furthermore, while it would appear that the Administering Authority does not have (Mr. Oudovenko, Ukrainian SSR) time or the money to solve the urgent social and economic problems facing Micronesia, it appears that the Pentagon is not stinting in its willingness to spend money and effort in turning the Islands into a strategic stronghold. One of the most important missile proving grounds of the United States is the Kwajalein Atoll, where the strategic Minutemen and MX systems are being tested. The free association agreement imposed upon the Marshall Islands provides for the use of Kwajalein as a testing ground for at least 30 more years. According to press reports, it is planned to set up a major military base on the Palau Islands for a Pacific Ocean strike force. Thus, what we are witnessing is the militarization of Micronesia, which threatens the peaceful development of the Islands, and is thus in direct contradiction with one of the fundamental tasks of the Trusteeship system which is, according to Article 76 a of the Charter, "to further international peace and security". It is quite clear that the militarization of Micronesia is fraught with danger, and not only for the people of the Territory. Turning it into into a 'military strategic staging point of the Pentagon is something which represents a threat to all the peoples of the Pacific and radically conflicts with the idea of turning the Pacific OCean into a nuclear-weapon-free zone, an idea which is rapidly gaining ground. The actions taken by the United States with regard to the United Nations Trust Territory of Micronesia are unilateral, arbitrary and devoid of any legal validity. It is the duty of the United Nations and of the whole international community to repudiate flatly the illegal bid of the United States to assume the role of the master of the fate of peoples. Responsibility for this Territory, until its people achieves true independence, continues to lie with the United Nations. (Mr. OUdovenko, Ukrainian SSR) No less dangerous are the military activity.and military presence of colonial Powers in other dependent Territories, for example Guam,Diego Garcia, Bermuda, the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands and PUerto Rico. As regards the importance of the Declaration on decolonization, its scope is not confined solely to the formal proclamation of independence or autonomy. The " Declaration solemnly prodlaims the need for the immediate and rapid enf:Jing of colonialism in all areas and in all its manifestations. Unfortunately, if I may so put it, neo-colonialism has come to take the place of the old, classical form of cOlonialism. In pursuing a policy of neo-eolonialism the imperialists are attempting to rob the young States of the substance of their hard-won sovereignty and to preserve and even reinforce imperialist control over them. In practice this has taken the form of depriving the peoples of liberated countries of the right to determine for themselves the ways and means of their own development and forcing them to. bow to the dictates of monopolistic capital. The imperialist Powers are trying to preserve and perpetuate a system of relations based on exploitation. Their forms and methods may change, but the essence remains unchanged. In present circumstances, it is not difficult to calculate who is financing whom. All the statistics show one thing, that the balance is unfavourable to the developing countries. The flow of capital into those countries is far less than the outflow of resources to the West. So-called generous assistance amounts to an irremovable yoke of debt around the necks of the peoples which make up more than half of mankind. In 1985 the external debt of the developing countries amounted, according to united Nations data, to approximately $1 trillion. Certain countries have been forced, in order to amortize part of a loan and the interest on it, to allocate up to 40 or even 50 per cent of their export earnings. In connection with the outflow (Mr. Oudovenko, Ukrainian SSR) of financial resources from developing countries, the burden of externally imposed indebtedness means for them a substantial dimming of their prospects of economic development and a further exacerbation of what are already very difficult social and economic problems. This situation, it would appear, is to the liking of certain Western countries, which have been torpedoing the global negotiations on the most important economic problems, preventing the adoption of a code of conduct for transnational corporations and doing everything in their power to prevent the normalization of international economic relations and the development of economic operation on the basis of true equality and mutual benefit, as laid down in the important documents of the united Nations, inclUding the Charter of EConomic Rights and Duties of States and the Declaration on the Establishment'of a New International Economic Order. This policy of the Western countries has aroused bitter criticism on the part of the non-aligned countries, particularly at the Eighth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, held recently in Harare, and in the course of this session of the General Assembly. The Ukrainian SSR wholeheartedly supports the demands of the developing countries for the extension of the process of the final elimination of the colonial order to the economic sphere also. In addition to stepping up their economic expansion in the developing world, the neo-colonialists have had ever more active recourse in recent years to methods of force even to the extent' of exerting military pressure. The territories and resources of many liberated States and whole regions have been declared spheres of vital interests by certain western countries. All means of advancing those interests are considered permissible. western countries are attempting to strengthen their influence over developing countries and in essence are dictating (Mr. Oudovenko, Ukrainian SSR) to them by building new military and political blocs and strengthening old ones in various parts of the world and 'expanding their network of military bases and their military presence. Imperialism is placing increasing emphasis on the destabilization of Governments it does not like and to this end is using various kinds of commercial .. and economic sanctions and mobilizing, arming and financing counter-revolutionary gangs. The co-operation of imperialistic forces with Israel, which ~s directed against the Arab peoples, the support of the South African racist regime, the in~ervention in Grenada, the raids into Afghanistan, the direct military and political assistance to anti-people regimes and the undeclared wars against Nicaragua and Angola are all links in a single chain of policy designed to crush the national liberation movements. The Ukrainian SSR attaches very great importance to united action on the part of all ~embers of the international community and international organizations designed to ensure the consistent, comprehensive and final implementation of all the provisions of the Declaration on decolonization. In this Legard I should like to highlight the considerable and very useful work done by the Special Committee on decolonization, under its Acting Chairman, the Permanent Representative of Cuba to the United Nations, Ambassador Oramas Oliva. As was pointed out in the Ukrainian SSR's replies to the Secretary-General to questions about Namibia (A/41/614), those on the universal implementation of the right of peoples to self-determination for the effective guarantee and obs~rvance of human rights (A/41/433/Add.3) and those on the policy of apartheid (A/41/S06), the Ukrainian SSR'wholeheartedly supports the just struggle against all forms of colonialism and nee-colonialism, foreign domination and diktat and for freedom, true independence and genuine peace and security. (Hr. Oudovenko, Ukrainian SSR) In conclusion, I should like to stress once again that the Ukrainian SSR vigorously supports the implementation of the Declaration on decolonization as applicable to Namibia, Micronesia, New Caledonia and other colonial and dependent Territories. Mr. TADESSE (Ethiopia): The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and peoples, with whose development and adoption m¥ country was closely associated, represents the noble, common aspirations of the human race to freedom ano independence. It is rightly said that the Declaration is the united Nations Charter on decolonization, the implementation of which has brought this world body to the threshold of achieving its cherished objectives in this respect. There is, therefore, sufficient cause for the united Nations to be proud of its achievements of the last four decades in the field of decolonization. Millions of people in colonial Territories have won their freedom. As a result, close to 100 independent States have joined the ranks of the community of free nations. Despite the designs of those with a blunted 09nscience to derail fulfilment of the yearning for independence of peoples in colonial and dependent Territories, a sense of justice still prevails. It is also reassuring to note that the Declaration affirms the fact that "the process of liberation is irresistible and irreversible". Nevertheless, the fact that the United Nations, in the fifth decade of its life, still ~,lintains on its agenda the question of decolonization is a reflection of the challenge that the world body is faced with in bringing to completion the process of decolonization. Mankind cannot attain the full measure of freedom without obliterating the last remaining vestiges of colonialism and all its other manifestations. The Declaration in resolution 1514 (XV), in full consonance with the United Nations Charter, has set as its goal "the creation of conditions of stability and well-being and peaceful and friendly relations b~sed on respect for the principles of equal rights and self-determination of all peoples •••• It also rightly warns that "the continued existence of colonialism prevents the development of international economic co~,peration, impedes the social, cultural and economic development of dependent peQples and militates against the united Nations ideal of universal peace·. The situation obtaining in southern Africa in pa~cicular attests to the wisdom of and the need for such a warning. Negating all norms of international bahaviour, the white minority regime in South Africa stands at the forefront of the forces trampling underfoot the provisions of this Declaration and all other international instruments. Racist Pretoria is not only guilty of grave crimes against humanity but also a source of threat to international peace and security. As my delegation has had the opportunity to present its views on this and other colon;'al Territories both in the FOurth Committee and in the plenary Assembl] in the course of this session, I refrain from reiterating them here. It is none the less the wish of my delegation to underline the fact that because of the anachronistic colonial policies of SOffie States, particularly in Namibia and, indeed, in the other dependent Territories, a section of humanity , ~ntinues to ba denied the dignity and joy of liberation which the universally recognized principles of the Declaration have thus far ensured ~o peoples in the formerly colonial and depen~ent Territories. Brute force and other means of suppression are being empluyed against the legitimate struggle and aspirations of . peoples under colonial domination, and are also aimed at weakenin~ the role of the united Nations as champion of the ri9ht~ of peoples in colonial and dependent Territor!es • Yet, against th~ wishes of colonial Powers, history marches forward. If the past has any l~sson to offer, it is that all those that espouse the noble cause of independence and freedom will eventusl1y prevail. The history of all formerly colonial nations also b3ars witness to the fact that no panoply of lethal weapons or any designs could be mightier than the popular will and aspirations of peoples resolutely exercising their right to rid themselves of domination and exploitation. Ethiopia's full support for and solidarity with peoples struggling under colonial systems stems from both principle and its own national experience and history. Our principled support for the Upited Nations through its Special Committee of 24, which is striving for the completion of the decolonization process is a ~nifestation of this conviction. My delegation strongly believes that the co~pletion of this process would not only bring freedom and independence to peopl~o still languishing in colonial bondage but also go a long ~ay in contributing to international peace and security. In ~peaking..on. this item on the implementat~on.of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonia~ ~ountries a~d Peoples, my delegation wishes to • '. .. I , . reaffirm Ethiopia's total commitment and dedication to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, which envisage a world free from inequality and subjugation. Ethiopia's principled stand on this issue is nurtured by the country's centuries-old history in which it had to make heavy sacrifices succes~fully to preserve its independence agai~st aggressors and colonizers. My country's unfailing support for peoples struggling to regain their independence is, therefore, a function of its own historical heritage, reinforced by the goals of its popular revolution and the obligations it has undertaken under the Charter of the United Nations • . We are very proud to be a founding and active member of the Committee of 24, which is entrusted with the follow-up of the implementation of the Declaration. In our view, it is a Committee that is highly regarded for its contributions but whose present tasks are being impeded by the double standard of some Member. States. Those among the permanent members of the Security Council, in particulnr, should desist from delaying and obstructive actions that hinder the efforts of the United Nations aimed at the total emancipation.of colonial Territories. Principles must have universal application, and it follows logically that principles should not and cannot be SUbjected to the whims or strategic interests of any Power. In this respect, we are all bound by the inescapable du~y to facilitate the " universal application of the principles of equal rights, self-determination and independence, and, to this end, to accelerate the noble task of decolonization. The fact that the number of NOn-Self-Governing Territories has drastically decreased and that the populations affected are considerably smaller should in no Mr. KASEMSRI (Thailand)& M1 delegation pa~ticipates in the debate on item 19, entitled "Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial COuntries and Peoples", because we respect fully the equal rights and the right to self-determination of all peoples. MY delegation woula like also to see the speedy end of the colonialism, foreign occupation and alien domination which continue to prevail in various parts of the world. It is, therefore, my delegation's intention to reiterate our full support for those unfortunate pe~ples in their quest for freedom and independence. We are all aware that the colonialism, foreign occupation and alien domination imposed upon those unfortunate peoples are immoral and in contravention of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to C~lonial Coun~ries and peoples and the universal Declaration of Human Rights. FUrthermore, these acts violate the legitimate rights and aopirations of peoples and will inevitably widen conflicts between States, and thuu pose a threat to international peace and security. Hence, my delegation shares the concern of the international community over the deteriorating situations whereby peoples are still deprived of their basic rights, in particular the right to self-determination, freedom and independence. My delegation would therefore like"to reiterate its: unqualified support for the concerted" international efforts towards the' early implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and peoples in seeking appropriate "ways and means for the imm~diate and full implementation of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 "DeCem~er 1960 and the relevant resolutions and decisions of the United Nations in all territories, including Namibia, which, regrettably, have not yet attai,ned independence, and in particular towa~ds specific proposals fOt the elimination of the remaining manifestations of colonialism, foreign occupation and alien domination. With regard to the situation in New caledonia, my delegation shares the concern of the international community over the deteriorating situation prevailing in that Territory. New Caledonia has been under French rule for more than 133 years - since 24 September 1853. New Caledonia wa5 one of 74 Territories listed in General Assembly resolution 66 (I) of 14 December 1946 to which Article 73 (e) of the Charter was applicable. In this regard the United Nations, in particular the Special Committee of 24, has not had the opportunity to review" information with regard to the Territory~s progress towards self-determination since 1947. The growing resistance by the indigenous Kanaks against the French Administration and the ensuing viOlence and counter-violence in recent years have made international headlines, while at the same time the French authorities have attempted to promote peace and order through a series of actions, CUlminating in the Fabius Plan whicn was well accepted generallYJ thus the efforts by some countries last year to r~inscribe the Territory under General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and Chapter XI of the Charter was deferred. On the other hana, over the long span the F~ench Government has shown inconsistency in its policY towards New ca1e~onia. l~ is also true to say that periodic changes in French policy have affected the future of the people in New Caledonia and created doubts and misgivings among the interested parties. FOr instance, the proposal of the French Administration contained ~n the basic law plan of 1956 laid down a basis for the termination of the colonial status. Then came the modification of the basic law plan under the Jacquinot Law of 1963, then the Billotte Laws of 1969, the Stirn statute of 1967 and the Dijoud statute of 1979, followed by the meeting at Nainville-Les-Roches in July 1983 when the French Government came to recognize, inter alia, "the legitimacy of the claims of the Kanak people, first occupant of the territory, inclUding their innate and active right to independence." A further change was made in May 1984 when the Lernoine Statute was introduced, which provided for internal self-government for five years and a referendum in 1989 to choose between maintaining the statute, reinforcing autonomy~ or independence. Again, the Fabius Plan of 23 August 1985 proposed independence in association with France, subject to a referendum in New Caledonia in 1987. The Fabius Plan was well received by the interested parties and was partly implemented. However, after the French elections in March 1986 the situation concerning New Caledonia was changed once again. On 17 JUly of this year a new policy was adopted which provided for a referendum to be held within one year, with the increasing prospect of continued French control over the Territory. In view of the foregoing, my delegation shares the view of the South Pacific Forum countries that this latest change in French policy constitutes a backward step, because some key elements in the Fabius Plan, which recognized the aspirations of the Kanaks - the largest indigenous group - are absent. Furthermo~e, my delegation shares the concern of the POrum count~ies that if the outcome of the referendum ruled out t~e,prospect of independence the situation in New Caledonia would be further exacerbated. France should therefore give careful consideration to the legitimat~ concerns of the Kanaks and the Pacific Forum countries. In this connection my delegation is encouraged by the readiness of all interested parties to have dialogues and would urge them to do so. My delegation supports the draft resolution before us, which requests the reinscription of New Caledonia on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. My delegation believes that the reinscription of New Caledonia would enable the united Nations to review regularly the process of decolonization in New Caledonia. The Charter of the United Nations, in particular Chapter XI, and the Declaration on decolonization as contained in resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 proclaim the right to self-determination and independence for all Non-Self-Governing Territories and peoples. Furthermore, the General Assembly has already established principles to determine when a territory is to be regarded as non-self-governing. These are set out in its resolution 1541 (XV) of 15 December 1960. The status of that resolution in the development of international law relating to Non-Self-Governing Territories has also been recognized by the International COurt of Justice. In this connection, the principles contained in General Assembly resolution 1541 (XV) can determine whether a territory is non-self-governing in terms of the Charter and the Declaration on decolonization. Principle IV of resolution 1541 (XV), in particular, states that' -Prima Facie there is an obli9~tion to transmit information in respect of a territory which is geographically separate and is distinct ethnically and/or culturally from the country administering it.- (resolution 1541 (XV), annex) To this is added the fact that New Caledonia has not relinquished its status of dependency to France. (Mr. Kasemsri, Thailand) In conclusion, my delegation would like to reiterate our earnest desire to see a peaceful transition in New Caledonia in a manner which secures the rights of the inhabitants, with due regard for the legitimate concerns of the largest group which constitutes the original inhabitants. In this QOnnection my delegation would like to appeal to France and all interested parties to render their full co-operation to this Organization with a view to bringing about the speedy decolonization of New Caledonia. Mr. CHAGULA (United Republic of Tanzania): Before beginning my brief statement on the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, under item 19 of the agenda, on behalf of my delegation I should like to express our appreciation for the comprehensive reports 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 - the Special Committee on d(~olonization - as contained in documents A/41/23, Parts I to IX, as well as for the accompanying informative COmmittee working papers prepared by the Secretariat. The report of the Security Council concerning the ~rust Territory of the Pacific Islands, unhelpful as it is, will also nevertheless be of some use in our statement. (Mr. Chagula, United Republic of Tanzania) In our brief statement, as we are members of the Special Committee on decolonization, we shall not touch specifically on any Non-Self-Governing Territories~ particularly those on which the General Assembly has already debated at this session under other agenda items. Rather, we shall simply confine our observations to some broad aspects of the report bf the Special Committee on decolonization. I shall begin with the auestion of the list of Territories to which the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples is applicable. Here I shall simply state that my delegation will participate fully in the consideration by the General Assembly af the recommendations of the Special Committee on decolonization on New Caledonia, having reg~rd to the present non-self-governing status of that Territory and to the provisions of General Assembly resolutions 1514 (XV), of December 1960, and others, following the establishment of the Special Committee by the General Assembly in November 1961. Regarding the auestion of the co-operation and participation of administering Powers in the work of the Special Committee on decolonization, we commend the Governments of New zealand, portugal and the United States of America, in their capacity as administering Powers of Non-Self-Governing Territories, ~or continuing to participate fully in the work of the Special Committee during 198~. In particular, my delegation congratulates the Government of New Zealand on its very positive contributions to the success of the United Nations Visiting Mission to Tokelau last July. It is against this background that my delegation sincerely hopes that the General Assembly will adopt by consensus the draft resolution on Tokelau, as recommended by the Special Committee on decolonization. On the other hand, my delegation also joins the Special Committee in expressing its regret at the decision of the Government of the united Kingdom to (Mr. Chagula, United Republic of Tanzania) discontinue participating 1n the work of the Special Committee although it will continue to fulfil its responsibilities under the united Nations Charter towards its Non-Self-Governing Territories, particularly those spelt out under Article 73 of the Chart~r. Be that as it may, my delegation, for the reasons given by the Special Committee, strongly urges the British Government seriously to reconsider its decision. It is also our hope that the United Kingdom, as administering Power of a good number of Non-Self-Governing Territories, will continue to permit the access of United Nations visiting missions to Territories under its administration in accordance with the united N&tions Charter. In connection with both the auestion of activities of foreign economic and other interests which are impeding the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples in Namibia and in &11 other Territories under colonial domination and efforts to eliminate colonialism, apartheid and racial discrimination in southern Africa and the auestion of military activities and arrangements by colonial Powers in Territories under their administration which might be impeding the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, as a member of the Special Committee on decolonization, my country fully supports the report of the Special Committee on both these issues and considers it unnecessary to debate them again in the General Assembly. Therefore, my delegation will fully support both the draft resolution and the draft decision recommended by the Special Com~ittee on these two issues. However, we urge Member states, and the international community as a whole, seriously to consider implementing the draft resolution and decision, after their adoption by the General Assembly, as both these activities provide very serious impediments to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of (Mr. Chagula, United Republic of Tansania) Independence to Oolonial Countries and Peoples, particularly in the ,small Non-Self-Governing Territories. A special responsibility falls on the administering Powers of Non-Self-Governing Territories in this regard. In the case of Namibia, however, the responsibility falls on the whole membership of our organization, for very well known reasons~* Let me now briefly deal with the question of the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the united Nations. First, my delegation joins the Special Committee in expressing appreciation to those specialized agencies and other organizations of the United Nations system which continue to co-operate with the united Nations and the Organization of African Unity in the implementation of the Declaration and other relevant resolutions of the united Nations. ~ delegation also urges all the specialized agencies and other organizations of the United Nations system to accelerate the implementation of those resolutions. Furthermore, in addition to regretting that the World Bank still continues to maintain certain financial and technical links with the racist regime of South Africa, which should be discontinued, my delegation joins the Special. Committee in, inter alia, strongly condemning the collaboration between the International Monetary Fund and South Africa, in disregard of repeated resolutions of the General . Assembly, and in calling upon the Fund to put an end to such collaboration. My delegation will thus fully support the adoption by the General Assembly of the draft resolution which the Special Committee has recommended in this regard, and it *Mr. Dos Santos {Mozambique), Vice-President, took the Chair. (Mr. Chagula, United Republic of Tanzania) is our sincere hope that the Boards of Directors of both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund will take the necessary corrective action in response to the draft resolution which, it is my hope, will be adopted by the General Assembly. I wish to say just a word on the auestion of the transmission of information on Non-Self-Governing Territories under Article 73 ~ of the United Nations Charter. We fully concur with the view of the Special Committee on decolonization that, in the absence of a decision by the General Assembly itself that a Non-Self-Governing Territory has attained a full measure of self-government in terms of Chapter XI of the United Nations Charter, the administering Power concerned should continue to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter with respect to that Territory. As this would just effect the correction of an oversight by the General Assembly in this regard, it is the sincere hope of my delegation that the General Assembly will adopt by consensus the draft resolution recommended by the special Committee concerning this particular issue. Concerning the very important auestion of the strategic Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, which includes Palau, to begin with my delegation is e~tremely disappointed by the absence of a final recommendation by the Security Council on what shouid be done following the recommendation of the Trusteeship Council after it had received the report of the Special Committee on decolonization. As the Security Council has not so far considered the report of the Trusteeship Council on the strategic Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, in the view of my delegation it is questionable whether the,Assembly can take any meaningful action on the Non-Self-Governing Territory of Palau. It is eaual~y legally Questionable whether the administering Power concerned can laWfully take any such action towards any (Mr. Chagula, United Republic .of Tanzania) constitutional advancement o~ the.~acific, Island~, as is now being, take~ unilate~.lly by that administering Power, in such a legal vacuum. M¥ delegation sincerely hopes that the Security Council will soon take the necessary corrective a~tion in this matter, as required by the relevant Article of the United Nations C.harter. Mr. MUDENGE (Zimbabwe) s Just last year we gathered here to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations Organization and the adoption of the Charter. This is an historic and sacred document reflecting the commdtment of the victorious allied Powers, as they emerged from the Second World War, as well as that of mankind as a whole, to the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security, and their determination to "save succeeding generations from the sco\uge of war". Many of us here - and I speak as one of the representatives of the developing world - were directly affected by the great European wars. Our fathers and grandfathers - as oolonial subjects, of course - were drafted and sent into battle alongside, and sometimes even in front of, their colonial mas~ers, in defence of freedom, liberty and the right of people to determine their own destiny, free from foreign interference or domination. Many of our fathers and grandfathers never returned from those wars, and even now lie buried in distant and foreign lands. But they went and they fought, lar~ely because they believed in the justice of the struggle in which their colonial masters had engaged. They were told that it was a struggle for freedom and for the brotherhood of man, a war again~t aggression and foreign domination. It thus came as something of a betrayal that once the drums of war were silent and the occupied lands of Europe had been liberated from fascist control, the colonial masters were not prepared to allow their subjects to enjoy the same liberty and freedom as they themselves enjoyed and in defence of which they had quite readily drafted those subjects into battle. The disappointment of the colonial sUbjects scen turned into outrage and ultimately led to the anti-eo1onia1 struggles for freedom and independence and thus, many of us found ourselves in direct as well as indirect confrontation with (Mr. MUd~nge, Zimbabwe) our colonial masters - determined to wrest tf.~ them that which we had helped them to retain, and that to which we too were $r.ti~led; I speak of freedom and the right to self-determination. It was, therefore, of equally monumental import&nce to many of us here to observe and to participate in the celebrations, also last year, of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the adoption by the General Assembly of the D9claration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and peoples. Par thi$ document, to many of us here, is the "Charter" of our own independence; crafted and midwifed by th~ victorious anti-colonial forces. Many speakers, both last year and again this year, commented upon the sYmbolic and very close relationship which exists between the Charter and the Declaration - for both documents resolutely affirm international belief in the fundamental principle of self-detarmination and international rejection of the concept and practice of colonial domination or any other form of foreign exploitation. This relationship goes much further, for as many have quite correctly observed, in its 40 years of existence, the united Nations has achieved its most remarkable and most successful results in the implementation of the Declaration on decolonization - a success borne out by comparing the assembled membership of the United Nations today with the limited number it represented just 40 years ago. In this struggle for decoloni~~tior., the contribution of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries which since, and even prior to, its form~l inception, has steadfastly and resolutely championed the cause of those still SUbjected to the outrages and indignities of colonialism, is second to none. Forever in the forefront of the drive to rid our world of this scourge, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries has grown in si~e and determination in direct proportion to the number of territories and people which have slipped out of (Mr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe) colonial bondage and' which have become members of that move~ent, eager to establish an identity of their own, among friends with similar experiences and aspirations, eager also to lend their action-oriented solidarity to the ongoing struggle to rid our world of the last vestiges of colonialism. The report of the Special Committee of 24 which is before ~s today, and upon which the Chairman and membership of that Committee stand on~e again to be congratulated, lists some of those areas of our world in which colonial situations,' sadly, still persist. Some of these - most notably Namibia and the ~~lvinas Islands - are the subject of separate agenda items and my delegation has already had the opportunity to express its views thereupon. It is because of our common and very real experience as victims of 'colonialism and the responsibility we bear to all those who remain today under the colonial yoke, that we, the non-aligned countries, view the Declaration on decoloniza1:ion, and more impottan~ly, its univ~rsal implementation, as absolutely fundamental to the realization of the principles and pur-poses of the United Nations, as set out in the Chartor. The General Assembly, either directly or through the Special Committee of 24, its "task force" with regard to the implementation of the Declar~tion, is entitled, and indeed obliged, to address itself to every situation in which a territory and its p~ople are not yet 6elf-governin~~. The General Assembly, armei with the Charter, the Declaration on decolonization,' and with lts own widely accepted criteria for determining whether or not a territory or people should be classified as "non-self-governing", has the right and the duty to apply itself to all such cases, regardless of any objections which may be raised or lod~~~ by the administering Power or Powers involved. (Mr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe) It is not for any suo~ Power or Powers to d~termine, and certainly not unilaterally, to what exten~, a territory or people under its control is or is not self-governing. For no matter how. fair or sincere that determination may be, the issues involved are so complex and so sensitive, that it ia just not acceptable that that Power or those Powers should sit alone as jUdge and arbiter, for as the old adage goes: no man, no matter how honest or honourable he may be, can be a jUdge in his own case. And it is in this context that 1 >~ome to the issue about which we have heard a great deal today, namely, the question of New Caledonia. We have heard much argument in support of the reinscription of this Territory on the list of Non-Self-Governin~Territories. The~e are also those who would argue that our interest and concern in this matter is tantamount to interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign, independent State. This is just not so. I have already explained the reasons why so many of us, the former colonized of this world, take such a close and abiding interest in these situations. But more than that, it has been clearly and convincingly established, in the past and again he~e today, that in terms of the Charter and the Declaration on decolonization, New Caledonia must be viewed as a Non-Self-Governing Territory. Accordingly, the Administering Power - in this case, France - has an obligation, both under Article 73 ~ ~f the Charte~ and under the Declaration on decolonization, to transmit information thereupon to the General Assembly, via the Special Committee of 24. (Mr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe) In this connect1on some have queried why we do not wait until" the special ~mmittee of 24 has eonsidered the issue, which, as Members know, is scheduled to come before the Special committee when it meets early next year. But if we followed that course of action, it would mean that we could only give this question our attention during the forty-second session of the General Assembly, in other words, a year from now, and well ·after the hoWing of the crucial referendum 'Uhi(:h is scheduled to take place towards the middle of next year. In any case, as statea in its report, the Special Committee of 24's deferral of the New Caledonia question to next year is subject to "any directives which the Ge"eral Assembly might give in that connection" - which is precisely why we are discussing the issue new and why draft resolution A/4l/L.33 is before us. At their Eighth Summit Conference held at Rarare earlier this year, the Heads of State or Government of the Non-Aligned COuntries, while reaffirming "the right of all peoples, regardless of the size of their populations or of th~ir territories, to determi~e their own destinies, free from any form of foreign interference •••• (A/41/697, pG 75, para. 149) also stii:t~ chat "New caledonia's inclusion in the list of non-self-governing territories would ensure that the United Nations regularly reviews the territory's progress towards self-government and independenoe. consequently, they strongly urge the forty-first session of the United Nations General Assembly to reinscribe New Caledonia on the list of non-self-governing territories." (A/41/697, pp. 75-76, para. 151) We are therefore pleased to note that this wise counsel has been heeded. It is a positive first step in the partnership necessary to bring self-determination to the people of New Caledonia. (Mr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe) Let me refer now to the-referendum which the French·Government intends to hold in New Caledonia to~ards the middle of 1987. This is'the most crudial decision the people of that Territory will ever take in the determin~tion of their destiny. FOr that reason no precaution is too great to ensure that the referendum is free and fair. And given all that has gone before, the sensitivities involved and the expectations of both tendencies within the Territory, it is clear to us that the greatest care must be taken to ensure that justice and fair play are not only done but are seen to have been done. No one appr~iates this more than those ~f us who ha'17e experienced, and emerged from, colonialism. Indeed, and I say this with a certain amount of humility, it is ou~ experience in the affairs of the process of decolonization, and our first-hand knowledge of the ways - oh yes, and, there again, the ways - of our former colonial masters that lead us now to make certain - let us call them observatlons regarding the forthcoming referendum. We make these obvious observations in a spirit of friendship, for we regard both France and the people ~~ New Caledonia as our friends. First and foremost, it is as necessary for France as it is for the indigenous population of New Caledonia, and indeed for the rest of the world, that the referendum should be free and fair, and 'that it should be ~een to be free and fair. There could be no better method of ensuring international approval and acceptance of the outcome of such a vote than by having observers fro~ the Organization witness the whole process. Indeed, the Chairman and some members of the Special Committee of 24 - as the United Nations bOdy responsible for monitoring developments in Non-Self-Governing Territories - would constitute an ideal and thoroughly reputable observer team. For the referendum to be adjudged free and fair, it will also be essential for the event to be covered by representatives from the international media (Hr. MUd~~, Zimbabwe) Qrg~nizations and for all,elementsof both tendencies concerned with the referendum to have open and free access to the media. Secondly, there is. the question of exactly how the issue, or rather how the choice, is to be put to the people of New Caledonia. Any opinion or poll-taker will confirm that the answers one gets depend to soma extent on, the questions asked and the manner in which those questions are couched. Of course, one could not presume to pronounce oneself on this aspect, but the administering Power should, we feel, be aware that this element will obviously play a crucial role in the carrying out of the referendum and, more important, how the results thereof are assessed by one and all. 'lbe third issue is, of course, the question of who will be entitled to vote. This surely comes down to a question of who exactly are the colonized. Obviously, the French military and similar categories without roots or permanence in the territory cannot be included among the colonized. ~ such nationals of France, the qustion of self-determination for Frenchmen was decided upon centuries ago. It is therefore most important that agreement be reached before the referendum takes place on who exactly is entitled to vote. We therefore urge that discussions between and among all parties concerned with the process of decolonization of the Territory should commence on all these and other outstanding issues if the referendum next year is to have any chance of success. In conclusion, let me stress that no one here is seeking confrontation or wishes to interfere in the internal affairs of any nation. The observations I have made, and the position on this issue of the non-aligned countries, which I and others have detailed, are simply and sinceralr offered as part of our contribution, a contribution that we hope will promote an efficacious and felicitous outcome in New Caledonia. .' . .'". and Peoples. The adoption of that resolution constitutes a historical landmark in the struggle for eradicating colonialism and for paving the ~ay to the establishment of equitable and just relations among nations of the world. It is a widely recognized fact that imparting momentum to the world-wide I struggle for national emancipation has become one of the most significant contributions the united Nations has made towards the implementation of the noble principles and purposes enshrined in its Charter. Scores of colonized countries and peoples have since achieved their political independence and have joined the family of free nationn, reSUlting in a steady increase in the membership of this world body. (Mr. Zarif, Afghanistan) Muoh as we hail the sucoesses in the field of deoolonization, we oannot but express deep regret that vestiges of colonialism remain in some parts of the world. It appears hard to believe that almost 3 million persons are still under the yoke of oolonial dependenoeJ that their human and natural resouroes are being depleted by colonialist Powers and their transnational oorpora~ionsJ and that their Territories are used for military and strategio purposes of the oolonialists. Namibia is the most outstanding example of inhuman oolonial exploitation and subjugation. The raoist and oolonialist Pretoria regime, in collaboration with oertain imperialist countries, partioularly the United states, has been defying the will of the international oomm~nity by refusing to withdraw its foroes of ocoupation and oolonial administration from Namibia. Seourity Counoil resolution 435 (1978), embodying the United Nations plan for Namibia, has remained unimplemented owing to the intransigenoe oonsistently displayed by the racist Pretoria regime and its closest imperialist allies. The natural wealth of the Territory and its human assets are oriminally looted and its soil is used as a beach-head for perpetrating aggression and aots of destabilization against the front-line oountries. With a view to erecting additional hurdles on the way to Namibia's independence, the racist and colonialist Pretoria regime and its main supporter, the United states, have introduced such irrelevant and extraneous issues as the presence of the Cuban intern~tionalist contingent in Angola. The international community has categorically rejected this linkage, which ie being used as a pre-condition for Namibia's independence. In order to ohallenge the role of the South West Afrioa People's Organization (SWAPO) as the sole legitimate and authentio rep~4dentative of the Namibian people, the apartheid regime has tried - in vain - to establish and sustain a (Mr. zarif, Afghanistan) subaervient administration in Windhoekwhich has been rejected by the people of Namibia as well as the international community. It is our hope that the upsurge in the global actions to put an end to the apartheid regime within South Africa and speed up the struggle for the independence of Namibia - actions whichreache~ their highest point at the fourteenth special session of the General Asse~ly on Namibia, last Septembar - will bring the desired results and that the people of Namibia will be ,able to fulfil their long-cherished aspirations to t ~6pendence and freedom. The people of Puerto Rico have also been SUffering under colonial domination. The united states, which is using Puerto Rico as a large military base for its geopolitical designel, has ruthlessly attempted to suppress the voice of the Puerto Rican people, who are yearning for self-determination and independence. We extend our full solidarity to the people of Puerto Rico in their struggle to cut the bonds of dependence. In Western Sahara, an old colonial Power has been replaced by a new one, resulting in the continued denial of the right of self-determination to the Sahraoui people. The Government of the Democratic RepUblic of Afghanistan fully recognizes the Government of the Sahraoui Arab Democratic RepUblic and calls on all parties to work for the creation of conditions conducive to the implementation of the resolutions of the Organization of African unity and o~ the General Assembly. In the South Atlantic a colonial empire that has long since been shattered is beUigcrently holding on to Territories which are within the sovereignty of the Argentine Republic. Britain, which has been interested in anything but the right of others to self-determination, is now championing this right, ironically enough, in a case where restitution of s~~ereignty is in question. (Mr. Zarif, Afghanistan) In the Indian Ocean, territories of sovereign nations - such as the Chagos Archipelago and Mayotte, within the sovereignty of Mauritius and the Comeros, respectively - are still under the occupation of former colonial Powers or their heirs. Many other small Territories also remain in the grip of colonialists and imperialists, which use them mainly as military bases for their global plans of aggression. We take note with satisfaction that the General Assembly is now considering the problem of New Caledonia, which has long been denied proper treatment by the international community. Thanks to the swelling tide of the struggle of the Kanak people and the positive response of many countries in the region, the problem of New Caledonia has become one of the topical issues of decolonization. We express our support for the struggle of the Kanak people, and call on France to abandon its dilatory tactics and embark on serious negotiations that will lead to the genuine exercise of the right of self-determinatiOn by the Kanak people. The Trust Territory of the. Pacific Islands, which is also famous as Micronesia, enters its forty-first year under United States adm.inistration. Under the Charter of the United Nations and the Trusteeship Agreement concluded between the united states and the United Nations in 1947, the United states Government voluntarily assumed the responsibility, as Administering Authority, of furthering international peace and security, promoting the political, economic, social and educational advancement of the people of the Territory and their progressive development towards self-government or in~ependence, and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental f~eedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or origin. After 40 years of life under United states rule, the Territory is transformed into a military-strategic springboard of aggression, and the people of the Territory find themselves economically, politically and socially more dependent than they were before. A careful study of the situation, of the petitions submitted by the Micronesians to the most recent sessions of the Trusteeship Council, and of other relevant documents clearly exposes the sorry state of affairs in that Territory. In his book entitled, "Micronesia: A Trust BetrayedW, Mr. HcRenry, former Permanent Representative of the united States to the United Nations, ,states: WThe United States economic development of Micronesia was a dismal failure. Political, social and educational programmes bore no relationship to economic realities and potentials. The result is a Micronesia which is considerably beyond a subsistence economy but which is unable to advance further or even maintain current standards without considerable outside assistancew• That is indeed a shameful state of affairs after 40 years of direct respon~ibility by the administering Powe~. Tens of thousands of acres of land have been earmarked for military purposes, and parts of the Territory have been turned into proving grounds for the hydrogen-atomic weapons of the Administering Authority. The population of Bikini were driven out of their islands after having been seriously affected by the radiation from nuclear-weapon tests. Existing military bases, aerodromes and harbours are being expanded or new ones are being, ·construc~ed• The United States is now pursuing a general policy with regard to Micronesia that is aimed at the illegal and unlawful fragmentation of a united Nations Trust Territory and its final annexation, under the pretext of a so-called free association that is being imposed on its people by means of prossure and threats. The Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan strongly believes that the question of Micronesia has a yery specific nature because of its vital strategic character. At the sue time, it is, we be~ie"e, an integral part of the problem of decolonizati,on, and thus the provisions of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples are completely applicable to the Trust Territory of the pacific Islands. (Mrg zarif, Afghanistan) The responsibility for assisting the people of Micronesia in exercising their legal and inalienable right to· genuine self-determination and ensuring for them the possibility of establishing ~n independent State is one which the United Nations must continue to bear. The delegation of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan strongly believes that the General Assembly should draw the attention of the Security Council with urgency to the question of the strategic Trust Territory of the Paci(ic Islands, in conformity with Article 83 of the United Nations Charter. The international community should not allow the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands to be absorbed into the united States. Failure to prevent this would be tantamount to ignoring the sentiments of the paop1e of the Territory and a gross violation of the United Nations Charter. We in the United Nations can take pride in our accomplishments in the field of deco1on~zation only when we rededicate ourselves to the principles of self-determination and independence for all nations and. countries. That rededication can find expression only if we continue without deviation our joint efforts to end the mediaeval phenomenon of colonialism throughout the world and once and for all.