A/42/PV.63 General Assembly

I should like to remind representatives that, in accordance with the decision taken this morning, the list of speakers in the debate will be closed today at 4 p.m. I therefore request those representatives wishing to participate in the debate to inscribe themselves as soon as possible. I now call upon the representative of Brazil, who wishes to introduce the draft resolution on this item. Mr. NOGUEIRA-BATIS'rA (Brazil): The forty-f irst session of the General Assembly, by adopting resolution 41/11, solemnly declared the Atlantic Ocean, in the region situated between Africa and South America, to be the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic. The overwhelming support received by that resolution is proof that the international community recognizes the specific identity of the South Atlantic region and the legitimacy of the concerns and aspirations of the countries in the area. As the Brazilian Minister of External Relations, Roberto de Abreu Sodre, stated at the opening of the general debate at the current session of the General Assembly: "The establishment of a zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic signified the international community's recognition of the determination of the South American and African countries of the region to maintain their independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity and to promote co-operation for economic and social development in conditions of peace and freedom." (A/42/PV. 4, p. 12) Our common approach, with this initiative, was intended to spur the progress of our countries within a safer and sounder environment. The establishment of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic gave a renewed impetus to the promotion and strengthening of existing ties of co-operation among the countries of the region. The attainment of its goals is our primary objective, to be achieved by the countries of the region themselves with, we hope, the increasing support of the international community. I have the honour to introduce,on behalf of Angola, Argentina, Benin, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Cote dllvoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo, Uruguay, Zaire and Brazil, draft resolution A/42/L.22. This text, like its predecessor, is the result of a joint drafting effort by the countries concerned. I am pleased to inform the Assembly also that Nepal has taken the initiative of associating itself with the draft resolution as one of its sponsors. Allow me to say a few words on the main features of the text and the ideas contained therein. Our approach this year was to build on what was achieved by the countries of the region with the adoption of resolution 41/11. The main thrust of the present draft is to provide for concrete actions with a view to fulfilling the aims and purposes of the zone. Accordingly, the text has only one preambular paragraph, in which resolution 41/11 is recalled. Then operative paragraph 1 refers to the efforts undertaken by the States of the zone to promote peace and regional co-operation, as reflected in the report of the Secretary-General (A/42/557 and Corr.l). That document well illustrates the interest of the international community in the zone and the work of the countries of the region to solve problems through international co-operation among developing countries. At this juncture, I should like to express the sponsors' gratitude to the Secretary-General for the preparation of that valuable document. Operative paragraph 2 of draft resolution A/42/L.22 exhorts those same States to persevere in their efforts towards fulfilment of the goals of the declaration, especially through the adoption and implementation of practical measures. The intention of the authors is to encourage the States concerned to further their joint endeavours, particularly by translating into concrete actions their political commitment to the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic. In this connection, I have pleasure in announcing that the Brazilian Government intends to hold consultations with a view to hosting a meeting of the African and Latin American countries of the region. The purpose of this meeting is to examine concrete aspects of regional co-operation in order to create a framework that will provide structure, method and stimulus for the implementation of the declaration of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic. The attainment of the goals of the declaration depends, however, to a great extent, on the support of the international community. This view is developed in operative paragraphs 4 and 5, which call upon all States - both within and outside the zone - to co-operate in the promotion of its objectives. One important manner of doing so is to refrain from any action inconsistent with the Charter and pertinent United Nations resolutions, in order to avoid hampering efforts to solve disputes and ease tensions in the region. In the spirit of the declaration of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic, the countries of the region, as reflected in the draft before us, are willing to intensify regional co-operation for economic and social development, whether through bilateral efforts or in the context or with the support of existing global, regional and subregional organizations. As indicated in operative paragraph 6, the relevant organs and bodies of the United Nations system could be of invaluable help in assisting, by means of their expertise and existing programmes of co-operation, the joint initiatives of the countries of the region. Draft resolution A/42/L.22 is clear and portrays the transparent intention of its sponsors: the establishment of a framework for economic and social co-operation among the peoples in the area, free from rivalries and conflicts that are alien to the region and under conditions of peace and security. In this context, it is the hope of the Brazilian Government that in the not too distant future it will be possible to welcome into the community of South Atlantic States the legitimate Government of a free and independent Namibia, as well as a South Africa free from the apartheid regime. The text of the draft resolution is, we think, simple, straightforward and uncontroversial. It is our sincere hope that the General Assembly, as a whole, will understand our motives and be supportive of the legitimate aspirations of the peoples of the South Atlantic region. land-locked country situated far from the waters of the South Atlantic. Why, then, one might ask, should the delegation of Nepal accord such importance to the item under discussion. The reasons for this are clear and compelling. Nepal has, as a matter of principle, always supported the establishment of zones of peace and similar other initiatives as useful additions to the existing body of confidence-building and conflict-limiting measures. Beginning with its forthright support for the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace, in this very Hall in 1971, Nepal has consistently lent its support to similar peace initiatives. They include proposals for the establishment of a zone of peace, freedom and neutrality in South-East Asia and for a Mediterranean peace zone. Nepal has, similarly, endorsed the proposal for a denuclearized Africa and for nuclear-weapon-free zones in South Asia and the South Pacific. It has also supported the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Latin America and the demilitarization and denuclearization of the Antarctic. Furthermore, as far back as 1975, my august Sovereign, His Majesty King Birendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev, formally proposed that Nepal be declared a zone of peace. This proposal, I am pleased to inform the Assembly, has already received the valuable support of 86 United Nations Member States, for which my delegation is deeply grateful. In this context, I should also recall that Nepal has promoted studies on the legal status of peace zones in international law - including that of a single-nation peace zone - under the aegis of the Asian-African Legal Consultative Committee (AALCC), which enjoys permanent observer status with the United Nations. On this occasion I wish to recall with appreciation the role of the AALCC in the progressive codification of international law, in particular as it relates to the concept of zones of peace. My delegation believes that such efforts could be usefully emulated by similar legal bodies representing other regions of the world. It was against that background that Nepal was honoured to co-sponsor at the forty-first session of the General Assembly the draft resolution declaring the South Atlantic a zone of peace and co-operation. It may be recalled that Nepal was one of only two countries not belonging to the South Atlantic region that chose thus to indicate support for the South Atlantic as a zone of peace and co-operation. Nepal was therefore greatly pleased that the General Assembly adopted that important resolution by an overwhelming majority last year. We believe its adoption reflects an enhanced and timely awareness of the intimate relationship between peace and development - the very nexus, indeed the very core, of Nepal's own peace-zone proposal. My delegation is convinced that scrupulous implementation of the Declaration of the Zone of Peace and Co-operation of the South Atlantic would make a major contribution to peace in the vast ocean expanse between South America and Africa - a region of undoubted strategic significance. We share the view that faithful adherence to the provisions of the Declaration - including that concerning non-introduction of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction and non-extension into the region of rivalries and conflicts that are foreign to it - would not only help to prevent the geographic proliferation of nuclear weapons but also to avert threats to regional and international security. Such threats could as easily emanate from the troubled region of southern Africa - owing, in very large measure, to the policy of apartheid of the racist Pretoria regime and its continued illegal occupation of Namibia - as it could by the transfer to the South Atlantic from the North Atlantic of East-West rivalries. My delegation would like to express its appreciation to the Secretary-General for his report entitled, 11 Zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic", contained in document A/42/557 and Corr.l and submitted pursuant to General Assembly resolution 41/11. As is clear from that report, many far-reaching projects of co-operation among South Atlantic countries have been undertaken since that important Declaration was adopted. My delegation views that as very encouraging and would support any move that promoted full implementation of the Declaration. We are also encouraged to learn, from the Secretary-General's report, that the Ad-Hoc Committee of the Comprehensive Progra~ne for Disarmament of the Conference on Disarmament, at a meeting in Geneva last April, accepted by consensuS a proposal to include in the progralnme an expression of support of General Assembly resolution 41/11. That proposal states, among other things, that: "The declaration of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic constitutes a concrete step towards the goals set forth by the international community to be achieved through the establishment of zones of peace in various regions of the world for the benefit of all mankind, thereby contributing significantly to the strengthening of international peace and security and to the promotion of the principles and purposes of the United Nations. In this context, it is recognized that the States of the region have a special interest and responsibility to promote regional co-operation for economic development and peace." (A/42/557, para. 12) On this occasion, my delegation would strongly urge that the third special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament, slated for next year, should, inter alia, look into ways and means further to promote the peace-zone concept in the context of regional disarmament. In this connection my delegation welcomes the resolution approved last April in Montevideo by the General Conference of the Organization of States Parties to the Tlatelolco Treaty in which it expressed satisfaction at the adoption of General Assembly resolution 41/11 and requested the preparation of a study on the relationship between the nuclear-weapon-free zone of Latin America and the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic. While my delegation is heartened by the efforts undertaken by States of the zone to promote peace and regional co-operation pursuant to resolution 41/11, we strongly urge continuing efforts for promotion of the objectives of the zone. As such, my delegation wishes to join the sponsors of draft resolution A/42/L.22, just introduced by Brazil, and hopes it will be adopted by consensuS further to promote the cause of peace and co-operation in the South Atlantic region. Mr. PAOLILLO (Uruguay) (interpretation from Spanish): The Government of Uruguay, together with the Governments of other countries of the South Atlantic, is endeavouring to establish stable structures of peace in the region, with the support of the international community, through the adoption of draft resolution A/42/L.22, which brings up to date and develops at this session the central purpose contained in resolution 41/11 of last year. The concept of a zone of peace is a broad one which pursues the legal and political reaffirmation of the right of peoples in an area fully to exercise their independence and sovereignty, to strengthen their security, peacefully to enjoy the benefits deriving from the use and exploitation of the region, and freely to develop their mutual relations particularly ruling out the establishment of any kind of guardianship from within or from outside the region. The concept of a zone of peace is also a dynamic concept. Its acceptance as the basis of the future status of the region constitutes only a general framework which requires the elaboration of legal and political formulas to give it real content. These legal and political formulas in turn will be the subject of further adjustments in response to constantly changing realities. Since zones of peace are not yet a precise and definite concept under international law, it is Uruguay's understanding that resolution 41/11 and the draft resolution it is co-sponsoring today before the Assembly, provide only an outline of the beginning of a process designed to establish more precisely its specific elements and features and the rights and duties it implies, both for the States of those zones and for third States, in particular those of military influence and significance. Accordingly, Uruguay will support, and urges other States of the region to do likewise, future multilateral initiatives to give more specific shape to these legal obligations and to define programmes of co-operation. It is our firm hope that this process in future might culminate in the conclusion of multilateral agreements. Among the important points that need to be clarified in the process of giving specific content to the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic is its relationship with the Treaty of Tlatelolco banning nuclear weapons in Latin America. The area of application of that Treaty overlaps the South Atlantic zone. Accordingly, Uruguay, together with Mexico, saw fit to co-sponsor a draft resolution which was adopted at the Tenth General Conference of the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America, held in Montevideo in April 1987, a draft resolution which provides for a study to be conducted on the relationship between the two zones in order to determine exactly the scope and implications of the legal status of each. In order to dispel any vestige of misgiving about the elaboration of the content of the zone of peace we should emphasize - although it hardly seems necessary - that the applicability of the rules to be applied in the zone of peace does not in the least mean any undermining of the fundamental principles and standards of international law regulating the use of spaces that are not subject to national jurisdiction; in particular, the rules of the law of the sea as embodied in the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea. Much less would they mean any infringement of the sovereignty of riparian States of the spaces under their jurisdiction. In the present situation and in the light of developments in the international arena as a whole, it has become imperative to avoid the South Atlantic gradually or suddenly becoming a new regional focus of strategic confrontation of the great blocs as has been occurring in other areas of the planet. By its own dynamic, which today has not been confined, that global confrontation tends to spread its disputes and differences world wide, and it thus becomes in the interest of our peoples to avoid becoming involved in a confrontation that is alien to our peace and security interests. It is thus necessary to increase the legal and political guarantees that will preserve the long-standing peace in the region, guarantees that result from the concerted efforts of the Governments concerned and from unilateral policies designed to reduce and discourage local and regional arms races. The establishment of the zone of peace should also lead to the gradual elimination of military bases of States that do not border on the South Atlantic. As my Government has been indicating, responsibility for the maintenance of peace in the region, the preservation of the region from arms competition, and the creation of effective conditions for international security, falls to the States of the region and also to States outside the region. The States of the South Atlantic also view our region as a zone of co-operation, an element that is a characteristic feature when compared with other zones of peace. The draft resolution now before the Assembly emphasizes that actions should continue to promote and carry out concrete programmes of co-operation between the nations of the region, giving specific meaning to South-South co-operation. Accordingly, it is important to point out that in recent months Uruguay has intensified its policy of regional co-operation for economic and social development by means of agreements with Argentina and Brazil. We hope that in the near future specific ways will be found for efforts of co-operation to include African StateS on the South Atlantic in the framework of a policy of diversification and intensification of our relations with those States. Naturally, a zone of peace in the South Atlantic cannot be worked out so long as there remain areas of confrontation and tension in the region. Consequently, in order fully to comply with the purposes of resolution 41/11 and the draft resolution before us, it is essential to put an end to the remaining conflict situations in the zone, using the many procedures for peaceful settlement provided for under international law. We must at any cost avoid repeating confrontations or conflicts in the region, whatever interests may be involved. It is important emphatically to state that the persistence of colonial situations is also a potential threat to peace and security in the region. In southern Africa there prevails a situation that is in flagrant violation of the rights of peoples, of an unequivocal ruling of the International Court of Justice and of repeated resolutions of the Security Council. Indeed that situation also violates principles strongly held by the international community and embodied in the Charter and resolutions of United Nations organs. Uruguay trusts that the draft resolution proposed will rally the kind of massive support that the Assembly last year gave resolution 41/11. If it does; we shall have taken a decisive step towards actually establishing a zone of peace in the Atlantic region, which, in the final analysis, would be a step towards the achievement of world peace. Mr. TIMERBAEV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): Putting forward the idea of creating a zone of peace and co-operation in the South Atlantic testifies to that new political thinking that is in harmony with the realities of the world today and is increasingly being confirmed in the international arena. It conclusively demonstrates the desire of the States of that vast region to base their relations on constructive interaction with a view to reliably ensuring, through multilateral guarantees, their own security as well as regional and international security, using political rather than military means, such as creative peaceful co-operation and the strengthening of multilateral machinery to eliminate the threat of war. That is precisely why the Soviet union supported General Assembly resolution 41/11 on this question, which was adopted last year by an overwhelming majority of the Member States of the United Nations. The Soviet Union's support for the creation of a zone of peace and co-operation in the South Atlantic flows logically from a principle of our foreign policy: an inter linked and interdependent world in which the task of eliminating the nuclear threat, curbing the arms race and laying the foundations for comprehensive security is considered absolutely vital and urgent. That principle and our firm policy for peace have found their reflection in concrete deeds and have already begun to bear their first fruits. A striking example of this is the agreement on a Soviet-American summit meeting at which, for the first time in history, an agreement will be signed on the elimination of a whole class of nuclear weapons and at which the key question of Soviet-American relations and nuclear disarmament will be considered, namely, the reduction of strategic offensive weapons and concurrent observance of the provisions of the anti-ballistic-missile Treaty. The creation of zones of peace and co-operation in various parts of the world is something we view as an important element of the construction of a comprehensive system of international peace and security. The Soviet Union has put forward major initiatives to ensure peace and security in the vast region of Asia and the Pacific, and actively supports the proposal concerning a zone of peace in the Indian Ocean and a zone of peace, security, good-neighbourliness and co-operation in the Mediterranean. It is g ivin'::l concrete assistance to the Latin American countries and the countries of the South Pacific in their efforts to prohibit nuclear weapons. The Assembly is familiar with our support for proposals to create nuclear-free zones in various parts of the world: in northern Europe, in the Balkans, in the Korean peninsula and in South-East Asia, as well as a nuclear-free corridor in central Europe and an agreement on confidence-building measures in the Arctic. The Soviet Union favours a comprehensive approach to ensuring security in the South Atlantic, and we believe there is a need for serious measures in the military, political, economic and social fields. It is very important to give effect to the appeal made by the General Assembly at the last session for the zone to be kept free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. It is also important that its appeal be buttressed by practical steps on the part of States to fulfil the obligations assumed under the Tlatelolco Treaty. Essential conditions of the creation of a zone of peace in the South Atlantic are the elimination of the criminal policy and practice of apartheid; the granting of independence to the people of Namibia in accordance with the demands of the international community; and the ending of South Africa's efforts to utilize nuclear energy for non-productive purposes, which represents a threat to regional and international security. The Soviet Union shares the concern of the South Atlantic States about the failure to resolve the problem of the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands. The colonial nature and the militarization of the islands contravene the principles of a zone of peace. In this regard we support the appeal that an early start be made on negotiations between Argentina and Britain to resolve the dispute on the basis of the relevant resolutions of the United Nations and also the Secretary-General's mission of good offices. Of great importance for a zone of peace and co-operation in the South Atlantic region are the provision of guarantees of maritime communication, practical action to limit the naval arms race and the beginning of substantive talks on confidence-building measures, the non-use of force on the seas, and the elimination of foreign military bases. The USSR once again declares its readiness to discuss with the United States and other major naval Powers, as well as States of the South Atlantic region, the question of appropriate measures to respond to the General Assembly's appeal at last year's session for the reduction of the military presence in this region and the exclusion from it of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. For both African and Latin American countries of the South Atlantic region the problem of development, the ensuring of economic security and the elimination of crisis phenomena in the economy are questions of vital importance. The development of mutually advantageous economic, scientific and technological co-operation within the zone, particularly joint exploitation of the ocean's resources, could play a positive role in improving the well-being of the peoples of the countries of the region. We have noted with satisfaction and interest the information on this question provided by Brazil and included in the report of the Secretary-General. The Soviet delegation believes that the effective implementation of the General Assembly resolution on the creation of a zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic would be a major contribution to ensuring reliable security in the region. In circumstances of the increasing interdependence of countries and the absence in the world of today of any sensible alternative to the policy of co-operation and interraction, the creation of a zone of peace becomes a major step towards the shaping of comprehensive security and the restructuring of international relations in accordance with the interests of all members of the international community. The United Nations, which is the world mechanism authorized to discuss and ensure the success of the collective search for a balance of the interests of all States, has a big part to play in the practical implementation of this initiative. The Soviet delegation will support draft resolution A/42/L.22, introduced by Brazil on behalf of a group of sponsors. Mr. ADEYEMI (Nigeria): As will be recalled, the item on a zone of peace and co-operation in the South Atlantic came up for discussion by the General Assembly for the first time last year, during the forty-first session. Under resolution 41/11, of 27 October 1986, the General Assembly thus declared the Atlantic Ocean within the region between Africa and Latin America a zone of peace and co-operation. It is on record that my country, Nigeria, not only supported but was one of the sponsors of this important resolution, together with the delegations of Angola, Argentina, Brazil, Cape Verde, the Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Nepal, Saint Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe and Uruguay. It is also on record that the resolution was approved by 124 votes in favour, and 1 against, with 8 abstentions. However, the countries that abstained later advised the Seccetariat that they had intended to vote in favour, which meant that 132 States voted in favour, with only 1 State against. My delegation has taken these facts from the Secretary-General's report on the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic (A/42/557 and CorLl) , of 21 September 1987, to buttress the widespread popular support for this issue and the importance which the States in the region of the South Atlantic attach to the declaration of the zone as one of peace and co-operation. The Nigerian Government is resolutely committed to the maintenance and safeguarding of the South Atlantic in accordance with resolution 41/11, overwhelmingly endorsed by the international community on 27 October of last year. My Government's views on this issue, which were transmitted to the Secretary-General on 28 July 1987, are contained in the Secretary-General's report mentioned earlier. The reasons for our commitment need no emphasis. Firstly, the South Atlantic represents a vital historic link between continental Africa and Latin America, two continents populated by developing but peaceful States intent on keeping their inter-connecting ocean free from unnecessary tensions, external conflicts, and Power-bloc military rivalries. Secondly, the African sector of this zone is the area of primary environment for my country in terms of national security and economic development, containing Nigeria's entire territorial waters and its exclusive economic zone, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), as well as the majority of the littoral and hinterland States of the African continent whose well-being individually and collectively depend on the South Atlantic. Thirdly, all the independent African States in the sector of this zone are active supporters of the denuclearization of Africa and frown at the threat posed to regional and international peace and security by the abhorrent and obnoxious policies of apartheid South Africa and its illegal occupation of Namibia in contravention of the norms of international law and in brazen defiance of the United Nations. The United Nations study on the question of the naval arms race and disarmament, as well as the consideration by the First Committee in 1986 and the Disarmament Commission in 1987 of the dangers posed by naval arms and systems to the security of littoral States, are ample but shocking revelations of the recurrent trends of naval build-up, especially by the world Powers and other militarily significant States, with possible dangerous consequences to the peace and security of States in the South Atlantic. Thus Nigeria, as a peace-loving coastal State, within the zone like many others, cannot but feel concerned at these frightening developments. Safeguarding the territorial integrity and hard-won independence of the States in the zone, as well as enjoyment of the full rights to peaceful maritime shipping and fledgling commercial transactions with other States on the other side of the zone in Latin America, are considered our legitimate entitlement. This is also conducive to the spirit of international understanding, co-operation and economic development of countries, as promoted under the united Nations Charter. Furthermore, the creation of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic is an inseparable chain in the consistent effort by the Organization of African Unity with respect to the 1964 Declaration on the Denuclearization of Africa, as well as a logical sequence to the Latin American countries' initiatives on the 1967 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America - Treaty of Tlatelolco. Together with the declaration of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic, these three initiatives are mutually reinforcing and serve to enhance not only regional peace, security and meaningful co-operation, but also advance the goals of international peace and security. Last but not least, the zone of the South Atlantic has abundant natural and marine resources, which need to be conserved and harnessed under conditions of peace and co-operation among the States of the area. Hence, it is paramount to note that these objectives can only be achieved if there is no outside interference, and in the absence of the threat or use of force, an external military presence, nuclear weapons installations and other impediments to the peace and liberty of States in the zone. While Nigeria welcomed the declaration of the South Atlantic as a zone of peace and co-operation, we are aware that appropriate means of giving practical effect to the objectives of this declaration need to be worked out. In this connection, we hope that the same overwhelming support given to resolution 41/11 will enable all States to give their unqualified approval to ways and means of As a first step, Nigeria urges all States, particularly the nuclear-weapon States, scrupulously to respect the region of the South Atlantic as a zone of peace and co-operation through the elimination of their military presence in the area. This will be further enhanced by not stationing nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction in the zone, as well as not introducing military rivalries, tensions and confrontation into the South Atlantic area. In this connection, an early resolution of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) dispute, as well as other colonial questions in the area, by the relevant parties through peaceful means will help immensely to facilitate the objectives of the zone. Nigeria believes that the total eradication of the apartheid system in South Africa and the termination of South Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia are indispensable to the total realization of the goals of the South Atlantic. Considecing that two important States lie on the African sector of the South Atlantic, Nigeria eagerly looks forward to the day when an independent Namibia and a free, democratic South Africa, without its apartheid manacles, will be welcomed as respected, full, sovereign members of the South Atlantic zone, and indeed Members of the United Nations system. That the international community gave its solid backing to the establishment of the South Atlantic zone at the time of its first consideration in 1986 showed the deep conviction of Member States of the potential for regional co-operation, socio-economic development, protection of the environment, conservation of the living resources, and the peace and security which the South Atlantic zone offered, and will continue to offer, for the States of the region, in particular, and the entire globe in general. As stated by the Nigerian Minister for External Affairs, Mr. Bolaji Akinyemi in his statement to the General Assembly at its forty-second session on " is prepared to co-operate with all nations bordering the South Atlantic in efforts to guarantee freedom of navigation, weather-forecasting and all plans favourable to environmental protection, thereby ensuring that the interests of all humanity are adequately protected. To our South American friends we offer the vision of the South Atlantic Ocean as an ocean that unites rather than separates us." (A/42/PV.14, p. 59) My delegation will endeavour to co-operate with any country to make this noble objective a practical reality. To this end, the Nigerian delegation commends to the General Assembly draft resolution A/42/L.22, entitled "Zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic", for unanimous adoption by representatives to the current session of the General Assembly.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this item. The Assembly will take a decision on draft resolution A/42/L.22. A recorded vote has been requested. In favour: Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Austr~lia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, BurlDa, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea~Bissau, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Ku~ait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Pan~ma, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, united Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, zimbabwe Against: United States of America Abstaining: Belgium, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal Draft resolution A/42/L.22 was adopted by 122 votes to l,with 8 abstentions (resolution 42/16).* * Subsequently the delegations of Benin, Ghana and Saint Lucia advised the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour. representatives who wish to explain their vote. Mr. SILJANDER (United States of America): Once again the United States felt compelled to vote against the draft resolution on the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic. When the United States voted against resolution 41/11 on this subject at last year's session of the General Assembly my delegation explained that there were what we regarded as serious defects in the text which required our opposition. Those views are well known and need not be repeated here. I will confine my remarks to the observation that the united States does not accept the premise that an internationally recognized zone of peace can be created by means of a resolution of the United Nations General Assembly, rather than as the result of multilateral negotiations. Mrs. GAZEAU-SECRET (France) (interpretation from French): As we indicated last year, France favours efforts to promote co-operation between States at the regional level and would have liked to be able to support the initiative taken in this direction by the States of the South Atlantic, with which we have so many long-standing ties of friendship and trade. However, last year my country had to abstain in the vote on resolution 41/11 because of the ambiguities in the text, especially as regards the limits of the zone in question, the obligations of the States concerned and the application of rules of international law. My delegation notes that those ambiguities have not been removed from the draft resolution this year, which contains a reference to resolution 41/11. Not being able to take a clear position on this text, we had to abstain once again.

We have thus concluded consideration of agenda item 27.

I should like to propose that the list of speakers in the debate on agenda item 29, "Question of the Cornorian island of Mayotte", be closed tomorrow, 11 November, at 11 a.rn. It was so decided.

I therefore request representatives who wish to take part in the debate to put their names on the list as soon as possible. I have to inform members of changes in the tentative programme of work announced on 9 October. The Assembly will begin its consideration of item 33, "Policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa", on the morning of Monday, 16 November, and will take up item 32, "Law of the sea", on the morning of Wednesday, 18 November. The meeting rose at 4.25 p.m.