S/31/PV.37 Security Council

The Assembly has before it draft resolution A/31 /L.3 and Corr.l.

On the question of the Comoros, two years ago, on 13 December 1974, the General Assembly adopted its resolution 3291 (XXIX). In that resolution the General Assembly, among other things, requested the Government of France, the then administer- ing Power, to ensure that the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro archipelago be preserved. In that san1e resolution the General Assembly, among other things, expressed the desire that the Comorian people should accede to independence in friendship and co-operation with France. Furthermore, the General Assembly called upon France to take all the necessary measures to ensure the attainment of freedom and independence by the people of the Comoros after the popular consultation to be held on 22 December 1974. 3. When that consultation was conducted the result expressed the overwhelming desire of the great majority of the Comorian people, who chose to be independent. Later, on 6 July 1975, that desire of the people of the Comoros was realized with the proclamation of independence and the establishment of the Republic of the Comoros. 4. The People's Republic of Mozambique was one of the first countries to recognize the Republic of the Comoros, the symbol of the victory of the Comorian people in their struggle against colonialism. 5. A few months later the Republic of the Comoros was admitted as a full Member of the United Nations. 6. However, while the international community was still rejoicing over the independence and the admission of the Comorcis to our Organization, France was occupying by force the Comorian island of Mayotte, which it dismem· bered from the rest of the archipelago. To justify such action France has invoked false, weak and self-defeating arguments, which, if taken into account, could lead us to NEW YORK 7. Mozambique considers the so-called referendums of 8 February 1976 and 11 April 1976 as an insult to the entire Comorian people, since they came to serve as a pretext to justify the violation of the territorial integrity of their country. 8. So the General Assembly should consider void and of no effect the so-called referendums of 8 February 1976 and 11 April 1976, and France should abstain from holding any other consultation in the occupied Territory. But if France persists in maintaining the scandal of dividing the new Republic, we must equally consider void right away any legislative acts which are in any way intended to legalize the French presence in the Comorian island of Mayotte. 9. It is very disappointing that France, which was progres- sively taking its name off the black pages of colonialism, has cynically insisted on remaining a hostile force in Africa. 10. We wonder by what strange manoeuvre the French Government could fmd itself obliged to break all its commitments to the international community and to the people of the Comoros and ask its Parliament to meet urgently to discuss a draft law on a new partial consultation of the inhabitants of the Comorian i~land of Mayotte. 11. Could it be that the desire of a certain group of colonialists somewhere in the Indian Ocean has so much weight in tile decision-taking of a permanent member of tile Security Council? Could it be that France has been impelled by the uncontrollable necessity of maintaining an imperialist base of aggression in the Indian Ocean? If this is the case, I would like to repeat what my President, His Excellency Samora Moises Machel, said in Colombo at the Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries: "We do not accept the multiplication of the imperialist bases of aggression which abound in our zone a short distance away from the coast of Africa and Asia, as in the scandalous case of Mayotte island, an integral part of the Republic of the Comoros, occupied by France. Still in the Mozambique Channel, France has established new bases on the Islands of Juan de Nova, Europa and Bassas da India. We might ask to what extent the countries of the region pose a threat to the security of France, or if it would be felt right if we were to establish a military base just off the coast of Brittany." 12. Mozambique feels that tile establishment of French bases in the Indian Ocean constitutes, in fact, a menace to 13. The occupation of the Comorian island of Mayotte by force not only constitutes a flagrant aggression against the State of the Comoros, a full Member of the United Nations, but also constitutes a threat to international peace and security. 14. Nevertheless, we hope that in the French Parliament the natural friends of the people of the Comoros will do their best to ensure that their Government at least rejects the fait accompli which the colonial administration of Mayotte wishes to establish. We hope that the French Government will establish with the people of the Comoros the climate of confidence that ought to exist between the two countries, on the basis of respect for the political unity and territorial integrity of the Republic of the Comoros. 15. France must respect the resolution adopted by the competent organ of our Organization-namely, the General Assembly resolution which affirms that the Comoro Archi· pelago is composed of the four islands of Anjouan, Grande-Comore, Mayotte and M obeli I resolution 3385 (XXX)/. France must respect the sovereignty of the new State of the Comoros. The present situation consti- tutes a threat to international peace and security and the General Assembly should, in turn, establish a strategy and take measures capable of promoting a rapid solution of the problem caused by this forcible occupation of a part of Africa, the territory of a Member country of our Organiza- tion. 16. Considering the situation created by the cut-off of all French financial, economic and cultural assistance to the Comorian State, the United Nations Member States should, either individually or collectively, give the necessary atten- tion to this fact so that the needs of the Republic of Comoros can be met. 17. The People's Republic of Mozambique requests the General Assembly to suggest strategies and relevant measures capable of promoting a rapid and efficient solution of the problem of the Comorian island of Mayotte so that Mayotte can be returned to the Comorian people.

I feel very pleased and therefore particularly serene at speaking on the question which is being debated today and on what we hope will be only a passing trial for the Comoros, to voice the sympathy and support of my Government for the Comorian people. 19. My remarks are in accord with the principles to which we remain faithfully attached-principles which we have defended and continue to defend with determination, but without passion. Foremost among those principles is that of the territorial integrity of States, for this is what is at issue 20. Our Organization recalls many attempts at geo- graphical partition directed against Africa, which was to be the scene of Balkanization in the interests of the former colonial Powers. Hence only the vigilance and maturity of the African States have been able to prevent the establish- ment of economically or politically non-viable entities. Are not the Katanga and Biafra affairs recent examples of this which forced the people of Zaire and Nigeria to make heavy sacrifices in order to maintain their territorial integrity and their complete sovereignty? 21. The Kingdom of Morocco has always denounced such attempts at the dislocation of States and the geographical partitioning of their territories. We have at all times supported the efforts of victim States whenever their territorial integrity has been threatened, and we have made the necessary sacrifices to ensure respect for the principle of territorial integrity. 22. My country fully supports this principle of the territorial integrity of States and it is a consistent element in our foreign relations because we ourselves once had an occupation regime that could have led to the establishment of several pseudo-States on our soil. 23. But because of the determination of the Moroccan people and the vigilance of our sovereign, His Majesty King Hassan Il, the kingdom of Morocco, like other countries with similar difficulties, is in the course of reunifying its territory and ensuring its territorial integrity. 24. As regards the question of the Comoros in particular, the delegation of Morocco recalls that since 1960, in the light of the aspirations for independence of the people of the Comoros, France had recognized the internal autonomy of the archipelago as a whole. The Joint Declaration of the Accession to Independence of the Comoro Archipelago, signed in Paris on IS June 1973,1 referred to the Comoro archipelago without indicating any exception concerning any part of the Territory. Furthermore, the intention to respect the territorial integrity of the Comoros was. con- firmed by the highest authorities of France. The President of the French Republic, Mr. Giscard d'Estaing, stated on 24 October 1974 that: "The population 1 of the Comorosj is homoge- neous ... was it reasonable to imagine that a part of the archipelago should become independent an~ th?t one island, whatever sympathy one might have for Its inhab- itants, should retain a different status? " ... The Comoros are a single unit, they have always been a single unit, and it is natural that their fate should be a common fate, even if some of them ... may have wanted a different solution. 25. It is this principle of territorial integrity that the Unite~ Nations. General Assembly has consecrated by adoptmg resolution 1514 (XV), which provides: "Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations." 26. In the debate yesterday afternoon [36th meeting], the Permanent Representative of the United Republic of Cameroon brilliantly introduced a draft resolution on the subject. That draft resolution, subject to certain reserva- tions, is in general in accord with the resolutions adopted at the summit meetings on the island of Mauritius2 and in Colombo. Therefore we support the draft resolution in essence but nevertheless wish to express justifiable reserva- tions concerning the reference in the sixth preambular paragraph to "the inviolability of the frontiers inherited from the colonial administration". I would recall the procedure which led to the establishment of a veritable colonial pact under which parts of Moroccan territory were first divided up and then occupied by various Powers. To mention only the city of Tangiers, everybody remembers that it was placed under an international administration made up of 12 Powers. 27. It was for these very relevant and fundamental reasons that Morocco, when signing the Charter of the Organization of African Unity [OAU] in 1963, expressed its most defmite reservations regarding the inviolability of frontiers inherited from the colonial Powers. 28. The Government of the Comoros, which seems to be undergoing the same process, thanks to the determination of its people and the foresight of its leaders, will overcome the difficulties which the archipelago is undergoing. We retain our faith in the future. We expect that France, which has the responsibility and the duty to help the young Comorian State to prosper and develop, will seek to find in dialogue the solution which will guarantee to the Comoros political unity and territorial integrity. 29. We have noted with great interest the statement of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Comoros that he favours such a dialogue [28th meeting]. France can only become greater in the eyes of Africa and the people of the Comoros if, remaining true to itself, it avoids confrontation with a State called upon to co-operate with it in mutual friendship and esteem.

The question which is before the General Assembly at this moment is regarded as extremely import- ant by the delegation of the Republic of Burundi. Indeed, the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte creates a very dangero~s precedent that is fraught with very serious 2 Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organiza- tion of African Unity, held at Port Louis, Mauritius, from 2 to 6 July 1976. 3,1. Now let us deal with the substance of this problem. It will be recalled that, as a result of the referendum on self-determination which was organized by France on 22 December 197 4 throughout the Comorian Territory, and following a natural evolution accepted by the administering Power, the population of the Comoros declared itself massively in favour of the independence, political unity and territorial integrity of their country by 95 per cent in favour and 5 per cent against, with a participation of 93 per cent. 32. Instead of complying with this result of the referen- dum, the French Government began to challenge the consultation of the people in the island of Mayotte, thus encouraging the trend towards the secession of that island from the Comorian State. That is why, following the consultation of 22 December 1974, the Comorian Chamber, meeting in special session, proclaimed the independence of the Territory on 6 July 1975. That young Republic was then immediately recognized by OAU and by the non-aligned countries as a sovereign and independent State. 33. Later the Security Council and the General Assembly both admitted the State of the Comoros as a fu11 Member of the United Nations, asking all Governments to respect the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro archipe- lago, which is made up of the islands of Anjouan, Grande-Comore, Mayotte and Moheli. 34. The Security Council was seized of the question of the organization of a second referendum limited to the popula- tion of Mayotte in February of the same year. Here it should be noted that France used its veto against the draft resolution which requested it to respect the unity and territorial integrity of the Comorian State.3 It should be further noted that the three Western Powers, which abstained when the vote was taken in the Security Council, did not support the French thesis that the French Govern- ment did not have to observe its solemn commitments to respect the territorial integrity of the Comoros because the French Parliament had not ratified them. 35. By deciding to impose a second referendum on the inhabitants of the Comorian island of Mayottc, France in fact violated the territorial integrity and the sovereignty of S/11967. 37. That is why Burundi does not want either to accuse or to condemn France but rather wants to appeal to France to begin negotiations with the State of the Comoros in order to find a solution to the problem of Mayotte. 38. We hope that the greatness of France and the diffusion of its principles throughout the world will inspire the French Government to follow the best policy, one which would be based on justice and reason, so as to close in a most glorious manner the last page of the history of decolonization. There is a wise proverb in Burundi that says that if one has the courage to eat the whole of the snake, one will certainly be able to swallow its little tail. 39. It is a fact that the French authorities have expressed a desire to resolve the Mayotte question, and we hope that that island will be restored to the Comorian State, of which it is in fa<;t only a province. 40. The President of the French Republic himself stated on 24 October 1974: "The population [of the Comorosj is homogeneous, with practically no people of French ongm, or only very few ... was it reasonable to imagine that a part of the archipelago should become independent and that one island, whatever sympathy one might have for its inhabitants, should retain a different status? " The President followed that statement by these words: " ... one must accept contemporary realities. The Comoros are a single unit, they have always been a single unit, and it is natural that their fate should be a common fate, even if some of them. . . may have wanted a different solution. "On the occasion of the attainment of independence by a Territory, it is not for us to propose to shatter the unity of what has always been the single Comoro archipelago." 41. Recently the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the French Republic told us from this very rostrum: "1 do not wish to harp on misunderstandings that I should like to see overcome. What is past is past; we are 42. In Africa we have suffered so much from secession- each time a Territory has been liberated from colonial domination-that we cannot tolerate the Balkanization of a small African Territory. 43. My Minister for Foreign Affairs stated on 1 October in this Assembly: "My country believes the Balkanization of the Comoros to be unacceptable because it is contrary to the oft- repeated principle of the territorial integrity of States." [14th meeting, para. 215.] 44. Thus the African States, almost all of which are friends of France, regard as inadmissible the dismember- ment of the Comoro archipelago. The Republic of the Comoros enjoys the sympathy and support 'of the non- aligned States, the third world, and the majority of this Assembly, which will certainly vote in favour of the territorial integrity of the Republic of the Comoros. 45. In view of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace [resolution 2832 (XXVI)], my delegation is concerned at the rivalry among the great Powers in the Indian Ocean. The problem of Mayotte in fact could become a threat to peace and security in that region. 46. After listening the day before yesterday to the statement of the Minister of Interior· of the Republic of the Comoros [ 33rd meeting] and also to the statement of the representative of France [34th meeting/, we are convinced that a solution based on reason and· justice and in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter will be found. 47. Burundi, faithful to the principle of respect for the political unity and inviolability of the boundaries of States, will give its firm support to the cause of the complete independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Comoros. 48. We are firmly convinced that just causes, like the loftiest principles of our Charter, will eventually triumph. The peoples of the non-aligned countries will continue their victorious struggle towards this end. These peoples have .made an important contribution to the advancement of mankind by their ancient civilizations and by their spiritual lofty ideals. They have written many glorious pages in the history of mankind and they will continue to do so.

At this stage, I believe it is hardly necessary for me to emphasize the importance of the question with which the General Assembly is now dealing. At the outset I must point out that the situation created by various acts of the former administering Power of the Comorian archipelago regarding one of its component islands, namely, Mayotte, has been followed most attentively and with growing concern by my country and throughout the world. It could 50. It is fitting to place on record the position of the Cuban delegation regarding the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte. The situation that we are analysing represents a futile effort to deprive a people of the full exercise of its right to self-determination, which has been fully and unequivocally expressed, and to destroy the territorial integrity of a sovereign State, a Member of the United Nations, of OAU and of the non-aligned movement. The gravity of these facts requires prompt and effective action by our Organization beyond any doubt. 51. The facts that confront us are well known. On 15 June 1973, in Paris, after 130 years of French colonization of the archipelago, the elected representatives of the Comorian people and of the French Republic signed the Joint Declaration on the Accession to Independence of the Comoro archipelago. Among other things that Declaration, in addition to recognizing the fact that the Comoros wanted independence and defining the mechanisms for their accession to independence, reaffirmed the unity and territorial integrity of the archipelago. This recognition by the colonial Power that the territory of the State which would soon accede to the community of nations was made up of the four islands of Anjouan, Grande-Comore, Mayotte and Moheli did not arbitrarily establish de jure a non-existent situation; on the contrary, it confirmed a situation which both in fact and according to French colonial law had already existed for more than half a century, that is, that the four islands were considered administratively to be one entity. That fact was recognized by the representative of France on 4 February last before the Security Council at its I886th meeting. The additional fact that the inhabitants of the archipelago have the same religion, the same language and the same economic and political interests gives real substance to that administrative unity; and to this must be added the so-called reasons of convenience which, according to the representative of France, militated in favour of reunification. 52. And if those historical reasons were insufficient proof that the Comoro archipelago is made up of four, not three, islands, some time later, in August and October 1974, respectively, a Secretary of State and the President of France made statements which, as far as we know, have not been refuted, recognizing the right of the new State which was soon to come into being to accede to independence with the same frontiers that it had as a colony. They also recognized the homogeneity of the islands and the ab- surdity of one island's having a different status from that of the others. 53. Having established, on the basis of the foregoing, the background of the traditional territorial integrity of the archipelago-that integrity that is now being shattere~-:-we have to analyse under what circumstances and condlttons the people of the Comoros exercised their right . to self-determination and independence. In accordance wtth agreed arrangements, on 22 Decemb_er 1974 the ~ople of the Comoros unequivocally voted m favour of mdepen- dence. In a vigorous show of civic responsibility 93 per cent referendum was taken on the assumption that, whatever the results, it would reflect the majority will of the entire-and I stress the words "the entire"-Comorian electorate, that is, the electorate of the four islands, and not the result obtained in one or more of the islands separately. 54. The referendum covered the entire archipelago. The colonial administration did not consult each of the islands separately so that each could individually decide whether it preferred a continuation of its organic ties with France or, on the contrary, independence. 55. With that clear and overwhelming decision by the majority of the Comorian electorate in favour of indepen- dence, the Cartesian logic which at least in the last few years had informed the decisions taken in Paris on the Comoros rapidly fell into disuse. Six months after the referendum and presumably on the premise that two thirds of the votes cast in Mayotte-that is, 5 per cent of the total votes cast in the entire archipelago-were against indepen- dence, the French Parliament passed a law providing for the drafting of a political constitution for the islands. The most disturbing provision of that law was, naturally, that which stipulated that for the draft constitution to enter into force it had to be approved by a majority of the voters on each island in separate referendums to be held on each island. The representative of France in the Security Council said: "Following the consultation, the French Parliament alone was able to decide to transfer sovereignty ."4 56. The practical effects of that provision were obviously very serious. On the one hand, it gave the voters on each island the possibility of countering the wishes of the overwhelming majority of the archipelago, who had already freely and unconditionally decided in favour of indep_en: dence. With that new provision there was an a posterzort change in the riature and rules of the game established for the December 1974 referendum. Thus, the administering Power was in practice refusing to give effect to the legitimate expression of the wish for self-determinat~on ~f the Comorian people as a whole. On the other hand, sn.ce 1t was known in advance that there would be opposition to the aforementioned draft in Mayotte, the dismemberment of the Comorian State was in effect being advocated and, therefore the breach of its territorial integrity, which as has been po~ted out had already been recognized by the highest authority in the mother country. 57. Furthermore, it should not be forgotten t~at by reserving the right of the French Parliament to overnde the sovereign will of the archipelago in the e~ent. of some or all of the islands approving the draft constltutlon, the afo~e­ mentioned law gave inadmissible power to the colo~1al authorities to nullify the expressed wishes of the C~mo:tan people in the exercise of their right to self-determmattOn. 58. Even if the Parliament had not exercised that preroga- tive, the very fact of providing for it in the law was counter 4Jbid., Thirty-first Year, 1886th meeting. 60. It should therefore have been no surprise to the French delegation that the Comorian authorities considered those actions as proof of the firm intention of France to perpetuate its colonial presence in the archipelago, in contravention of the results of the referendum in which the people pronounced themselves in favour of independence. 61. Adding insult to injury, the French Parliament on 31 December 1975-that is to say one month after the admission of the Comoros as a sovereign State Member of this Organization, five months after the admission of that State as a member of OAU and seven months after it had declared its independence through the intermediary of the national body entrusted with sufficient authority to carry out the sovereign will of its people-approved a law recognizing the independence of Grande-Comore, Anjouan and Moheli, thus arrogating to itself sovereign prerogatives over a part of the territory of another State which was a full member of the community of nations. At the same time it maintained, and continues to maintain, its presence in and military occupation of Mayotte, thus preventing that sovereign State from exercising its sovereignty over a part of its territory. 62. Similar violations of the sovereignty of the Comoros are the so<alled referendums of 8 February and 11 April of this year with respect to the territory of that country. 63. The gravity of the facts that I have pointed out is glaringly obvious. It was not by chance that the recent Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned countries condemned the aggression of France against an independent State recognized by the interna- tional community, demanded respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Comoros, and called upon France immediately to withdraw its military forces of occupation from the Comorian island of Mayotte. France's attitude was similarly censured at the session of the OAU Assembly which was held last August in Port-Louis. 64. In the opinion of my delegation, the actions of France are in flagrant contraventicm of the principles established in Article 2, paragraphs 1 to 4 of the United Nations Charter, with respect to the sovereign equality of States, the 65. Furthermore, the arguments advanced by France to justify its actions cannot, in our opinion, withstand even the most superficial review. Perhaps the argument that is most fraught with danger is France's intention to base its action on the so-called respect for the self-determination of the inhabitants of the Comorian island of Mayotte. If we were to accept that the wishes of 5 per cent of the voters of a territory could really cancel out the will of 95 per cent of its inhabitants and thus produce the dismemberment of a sovereign State, not only should we be violating the basic principle of respect for the will of the majority but at the same time we would be nullifying the principle established in resolution 1514 (XV), which is the corner-stone of decolonization and which wisely states that any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the. territorial integrity and national unity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter. 66. Furthermore, the centrifugal forces which such a distorted interpretation of the principle of self-determina- tion would introduce into the internal affairs of many States have already been duly emphasized by other speakers who preceded me to this rostrum, and I therefore need not comment on them. 67. In the debates in the Security Council an argument was presented concerning the difficulties presented by the French constitutional system for representatives of the executive branch in that country when the legislative branch does not agree with the decisions of the executive branch. My delegation is certainly not competent to pass judgement on a matter within the internal jurisdiction of another Member State. My Government zealously defends its own sovereignty both at home and abroad and fully recognizes the importance and validity of this principle of international law. 68. Nor shall I discuss the well-known fact that at the time when the events in Mayotte occurred the parliamentary majority it~ France was made up of political parties which supported the executive branch, a fact which may well have strengthened the people of the Comoros in their belief that the statements made by the leading political figures in France had been so worded as to lead them to believe that their territorial integrity would be recognized without further ado. I do feel it essential to point out that when we in this Organization admit that the principle of the self-determination of peoples can be left to the mercy of the will of the Parliament of the colonial Power which administers them, we shall have destroyed the foundations of the United Nations. 69. It is a well-known fact that colonialism resists a natural death. Before it enters its final agony, colonialism seeks ways of perpetuating itself. The situation we are now examining is taking place in a region where imperialist, colonialist and racist interests are increasingly active. ~ttary fo.rces that prevents that State from exercising its . u ~~vereignty over a given territory and the fact that its mabihty to do so is due to the action of its former mother cou~try can only increase the already dangerous level of tenSion. 71. My delegation therefore considers that the General Assembly should take energetic measures to make the Government of France realize the dangers to international peace and se.curity inherent in its present attitude in regard to the question we are debating, as well as the need to seek a just solution to this problem. !2. My delegation is prepared to support every initiative mtended to put an end to the present problem with regard to Mayotte and to guarantee to the Comorian people, whose struggle for self-determination we follow with ~rotherly sympathy, the full exercise of its inalienable n~hts-an undertaking which, we are sure, will be crowned With success. ~3. Mr. WARSAMA (Somalia): The illegal French occupa- ~on of the Comorian island of Mayotte must be viewed in It~ proper p~rspective and, as such, colonialism and imperi- . alism form Its bases. True, the colonial countries have in recent times registered great victories in their search for total emancipation; but, at the same time, colonialists and imperialists have never ceased to devise new methods designed to perpetuate the domination and the exploitation of the peoples they have under their control. 74. In reacting to the successful struggle of the oppressed peoples for liberation, the colonial Powers have never hesitated to resort to the most vicious repression in those countries still under their control, in a desperate effort to maintain their lost possessions. Along with the traditional ugly features of imperialism, we see now the manifestation of new ones. In this regard the dismemberment of the Republic of the Comoros, seen as the reverse process, represents a case in point. 75. France, instead of decolonizing Mayotte, has recolo- nized it, in utter disregard of the expressed wishes of the people and of its own commitment, and thus set the basis for a dangerous precedent. 76. OAU and the non-aligned countries have condemned France for this action. Those two organizations have considered that French presence in Mayotte constitutes aggression against the national unity, territorial integrity and independence of the Comoros. This aggression is of course in contravention of the United Nations Charter and of international morality. That Mayotte is an integral part of the Republic of Comoros is an established fact. France itself has never questioned that, and the declarations made in this respect are self-evident. 77. To quote but one of these significant declarations, the French President himself has said: "The population [of the Comoros] is homogeneous ... was it reasonable to imagine that a part of the archipelago He went on to say: "On the occasion of the attainment of independence by a Territory, it is not for us- to propose to shatter the unity of what has always been the single Comoro archipelago." H~ ad~ed.: "The Comoros are a single unit." We agree with this pnnciple and with the content of that statement. 78. It was in this spirit, and on the basis of the Joint Declaration of 15 June 1973, that the people of the Co~o.ros, on 22 December 1974, expressed its wish by a maJonty of 95 per cent to accede to independence. France, instead of accepting the results of the referendum, started to ?~t new condi~ions on the transfer of sovereignty to the ~egthmate authonties, and this has led to the forceful and illegal occupati?n of the island of Mayotte on 14 July 1975-exactly etght days after the Republic of the Comoros was born and just four days before it was admitted to OAU. 79. On 12 November of the same year the Republic of the Comoros, in all its parts, including Mayotte, became a member of the United Nations. The Republic of the Comoros, which is a Member of the United Nations, OAU and the non-aligned movement, is the victim of the most naked aggression being perpetrated by the former colonial Power, a founding Member of the United Nations and a permanent member of the Security Council. 80. France should be called upon to withdraw its troops forthwith from Mayotte; France should be called upon to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Comoros; France should be called upon to remove the danger that its presence in Mayotte poses to international peace and security. The responsibility lies with France and it is the duty of the United Nations to call upon Fran~e in no uncertain terms to comply with the United Nations Charter and the norms of international law.

Sri Lanka wishes to speak before this Assembly this morning on the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte. We do so with considerable awareness of the fact that the question at issue is one which, in our opinion, goes to the root of the concept of self-determination and the preservation of the territorial integrity of territories which were once colonies of the great imperial Powers. 82. I wish to say at the outset that we speak today with considerable surprise and sorrow that the nation with whose conduct we are expressing dissatisfaction is one of the major and most influential nations of the international community and has been throughout human history. 83. I do not wish to repeat views that have been expressed by almost all the representatives who have preceded me to this rostrum. I do, however, wish to draw the attention of the General Assembly, and therefore of the entire interna- tional community, to certain aspects of the chronology and development of events in connexion with the independence of the Territory of the Comoros which, in our view, are t~1e Ac~essio~ to Independence of the Comoro Archipelago, signed m Pans, recognized the sovereign independence of the Comoro archipelago within a maxinmm period of five years from that date. But on 10 October 1974 the French Government approved proposals for the holding within six months from that date of a referendum in the four islands constituting the Comoro archipelago. It is to France's credit that the French Government decided to hold this referen- dum without waiting for the end of the five-year period announced in 1973. In November 1974-in other words much _earlier-the French Government opted for a globai referendum, covering the four islands as a whole, in preference to an island-by-island referendum. That is, in my delegation's view, the crucial issue in the matter now before the Assembly for its consideration; it is indeed the factor which leads to a condemnation of France's present attitude. 85. On 13 December 1974 the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 329 I (XXIX) by acclamation without a vote. In that resolution the Assembly reaffirmed the inalienable right of the people of the Comoro archipel- ago to self-determination and independence; it also-and this is important-reaffinned the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro archipelago. That resolution was adopted within a month of the French Government's decision to hold a global referendum. 86. On 22 December 1974 the referendum was held in the four islands of the Comoros; it was a global reicrendum. The result was that 95.5 per cent of the Comorian people voted in favour of independence and only 4.4 per cent voted against independence. 87. Thus •. up to that point the situation was entirely s.1tisfactory; France was proceeding, in a fashion true to its traditions, towards the enhancement of total liberty in the world. 88. From 24 to 26 February 1975 the then French Secretary of State for Overseas Departments and Terri- tories, Mr. Olivier Stirn, visited the Comoros. In that Territory he declared that "Mayotte is an internal problem of the Comoros". 89. A few months later, on 7 July 1975, Mayotte refused to recognize the Government of the Comoros and, by cablegram to Paris, placed the island under the protection of France. Two days later, on 9 July 1975, the French Government took note of the unilateral declaration of independence by the Comorian island of Mayotte. 90. In my delegation's view that was a great betrayal by the French Republic of a trust which it had accepted, a trust which it had recognized, a trust which it was on the eve of fulniiing. 91. Between 28 July and 1 August 1975, OAU, at its Conference in Kampala,s admitted the Comoros to mem- 5 Twelfth ordinary session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity, held at Kampala from 28 July to 1 August 1975. te~ the Comoros to the United Nations by accl~ation, With France not participating in the vote. What is signifi- cant is that in resolution 3385 (XXX) admitting the Comoros to membership the Assembly reaffirmed the necessity of respecting the unity and territorial integrity of the Comoro archipelago. 93. However, within two months of the General Assem- bly's unanimous decision to admit the Comoro archipelago as a unit to the United Nations, the French National Assembly in Paris adopted a bill recognizing the indepen- dence of three of the islands that make up the Comoro archipelago as the Comoros, and treating Mayotte as a separate territorial unit. 94. On 6 February this year the Security Council, on the eve of the holding by the French authorities of an imposed second referendum in the Comoros, decided by 11 votes to 1, with 3 nations abstaining, that the proposed referen- dum constituted interference in the internal affairs of a Member State of the United Nations, a State which had just been admitted to membership a few months earlier. Because of the French Government's negative vote in the Security Council-that is, the French Government's veto- the resolution became invalid. 95. Two days later, on 8 February-almost as if there was a desire to challenge the General Assembly of this Organiza- tion-a referendum was held in the Mayotte part of the Comoros, despite the fact that the Comoros had been admitted to the United Nations.as a unit. 96. The actions taken by the French Government subse- quent to its own earlier decision to treat the Comoro archipelago as a territorial whole have caused us great disappointment, sadness and concern. 97. As this Assembly well knows, from 16 to 19 August 1976 there was held in the capital city of my country the Fifth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries. As is known, the non-aligned nations now number 86. That Conference unanimously adopted a resolution on the Comorian island of Mayotte. I should now like to quote the following from that resolu- tion, which is resolution 7 of the Conference: "Considering that the setting up of military bases in the Indian Ocean by France and by all other imperialist Powers, particularly on the Comorian soil of Mayotte, amounts to flagrant aggression against the independent States of Africa and Asia; "1. Condemns the self-styled referendums of 8 February and 11 April 1976, which it considers null and void, and rejects in advance: . "(2) any law or regulation passed by a French Jegisla- ttve or governmental authority aimed at legalizing any sort of French colonial presence in the Comorian terri- tory ofMayotte; "2. Demands that France should respect the sover- eignty and territorial integrity of the young State {Jf the ~omoros and immediately withdraw its military occupa- tion troops from the Comorian island of Mayotte; "3. Invites the President-in-office of the non-aligned countries to approach the French Government immedi- ately through its Embassy at Colombo, with a view to stopping the process it has embarked upon to give the Comorian island of Mayotte a special status, in order to create conditions favourable to the re-establishment of the dialogue between the parties concerned; "4. Appeals urgently to all the members of the Non-Aligned group to approach the French Government jointly and severally with a view to inducing it to abandon once and for all its plan to separate the Comorian island of Mayotte from the Republic of the Comoros; "5. Fully supports the action of the Organization of African Unity with regard to the setting up of a sub-committee of seven States responsible for studying and preparing any strategies and measures calculated to encourage a quick settlement of the problem of the Comorian island of Mayotte; "6. Decides to pursue this question and to include it permanently on the agenda of its meetings at all levels; "7. Appeals urgently to all members of the Non- Aligned Group individually to provide technical and material assistance to the State of the Comoros to enable it to cope with its serious difficulties".[See A/31/197, annex IV, resolution 7.] 98. This subject has now come up for discussion by the General Assembly of the United Nations. In consonance with paragraph 3 of the resolution I have just read out to you, in which the President-in-office of the non-aligned countries was invited to approach the French Government, we of Sri Lanka carried out that mandate and within a few weeks of the conclusion of the Colombo Conference my Government, through its Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, had occasion to convey to the French Ambassador in Colombo the views expressed at the Conference and the views contained in the resolution, and, through the French Ambassador in Sri Lanka, urged the French Government to give it serious consideration and to approach this problem in the spirit for which France has been known in world history. 99. Let me conclude these remarks by appealing to France, as have those who have preceded me at this podium. 101. We appeal to France in the spirit of its own background, in the spirit of its own traditions, in the spirit of its own contribution to human achievement, to harken to our appeal-and here I speak not only as representative of Sri Lanka but also as representing the present Chairman of the Conference of non-aligned nations, which covers more than two thirds of the membership of this Assembly. 102. It is our firm conviction that France will respond, and respond quickly, to these appeals, and that France will entitle us all once more to regard it as a country whose continued participation in the international comrr.unity will not only enhance the whole experience of the human family in the years to come but restore France to the position it has always occupied in the history of the human race as the progenitor, the inspirer and the cradle of the great human values to which all of us are dedicated under the Charter.

My delegation would like to associate itself with those delegations which have spoken before me and expressed their concern over the unilateral action taken by France last year-that of illegally occupying part of the sovereign African State of the Comoros. 104. Only a few days ago [21st meeting/ my Minister had the opportunity to tell this Assembly how we in Zambia are greatly disturbed and concerned about the neocolonial situation on the Comorian island of MayottP., which is a clear confirmation of the French Government's insincerity and inconsistency on the question of colonialism and racism. Indeed, it is unwelcome and unacceptable behaviour on the part of a Member of this Organization. 105. During its many years of colonial occupation of the Comoros France administered the four-island archipelago as one entity. France up to the present publicly admits that the people of the Comoro archipelago are one and have the same cultural background. However, France finds it fitting today to capitalize on imaginary differences created by itself in its sinister manoeuvres to usurp the sovereignty and territorial integrity of that young independent nation. 106. This attempt to dismember a sovereign State which is a Member of this Organization is misconduct of the worst order and should be treated as such and strongly con- demned by all peace-loving nations of the world. The facts 107. On acceding to independence the people of the Comoros clearly indicated in the referendum of 22 Decem- ber 1974 that they wanted accession to independence as one people of the entire Comoro archipelago. Therefore my delegation totally rejects any subsequent referendums held by an outsider to distort the already crystal-clear situation on the Comorian islands. Nor will my delegation accept any manoeuvres by any outside Power to confuse the interna· tional community in this regard. 108. Zambia condemns in the strongest terms this naked aggression against the people of the Comoros, which constitutes a grave violation of the territorial integrity of a Member nation. 109. This French action must not be tolerated, for another reason: it would set a most dangerous precedent, which would threaten the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other countries, particularly the small and the weak nations. 110. My delegation calls upon France to withdraw imme- diately from Mayotte and to leave those African brothers and sisters in peace. We appeal to the States Members of this Organization to use their influence both individually and collectively to accelerate the departure of France from the Commian island of Mayotte Ill. Mr. ABE (Japan): The United Nations has before it a problem on which the positions of two Member States- namely, the Comoros and France-are sharply in contradic· tion. The question of the Comorian island of Mayotte constitutes a matter of concern to the international community which, if it is not resolved promptly, may bear another seed of international tension. 112. The French Government, in conformity with the principles and objectives under the Charter of the United Nations, affirmed in June 1973 that the Comoros archipe· lago was destined for independence, and in December 1974 it conducted a consultation of the Comorian population, in the four islands as a whole, which resulted in an over- whelming majority of voters in favour of independence, while the majority of the population in Mayotte, one of the four islands, voted for remaining with France. 113. The Government of the Comoros declared indepen· dence in July 1975 and applied for admission to member· ship in the United Nations. On the recommendation of the Security Council, the General Assembly decided by con· sensus to admit the Comoros to membership in the United Nations in November 1975. 114. Although France did not participate in the voting in the Security Council and in the consensus of the General Assembly, it is notable that France took no action to object to this whole process eventually leading to the admission of the Comoros to the United Nations. Indeed, France deserves our commendation for its commitment and efforts to ensure the decolonization of the Comoro archipelago, 115. On the other hand, as I indicated earlier, while the result of the voting by the Comorian population as a whole showed the majority in favour of independence, as far as the island of Mayotte was concerned the majority of its population voted against independence. And France, look· ing at this aspect of the matter, took measures in December 1975 to accept the independence of the three islands of Grande-Comore, Anjouan and Moheli, but, as for the island of Mayotte, to let the people of the island determine whether they would go along with the Comoros or remain with France through a separate referendum. 116. Naturally, the Government of the Comoros stood against this position of France as it considered that the four islands constituted an integral entity. And the General Assembly, in its resolution 3385 (XXX) of November 1975 which decided to admit the Comoros to membership in the United Nations, endorsed this position of the Comoros. 117. The talks necessitated by such difference of positions were held between the Comoros and France, but unfortu- nately failed to produce any agreement. As the time of the planned referendum drew near, the Security Council was seized of the matter, met on 4 February 1976 and voted on 6 February on a draft resolution which proposed, among other things, considering the referendum conducted by France in Mayotte interference in the internal affairs of the Comoros and called upon the Government of France to desist from proceeding with the holding of the referendum in Mayotte. 118. Eleven countries, including my own, voted in favour of that resolution; France voted against it and three members abstained. Obviously, the draft resolution was not accepted. The referendum took place two days later and was followed by another referendum in April. Almost all participants in the referendum expressed their preference for being part of France. 119. Here we face a real dilemma in which the most fundamental principles are involved in conflict. The prin· ciple of the territorial integrity of the Comoros and that principle of the self-determination of the people of Mayotte have to be reconciled. 120. In this connexion, it should be recalled that in the recent history of international relations a number of colonial Territories have attained their independence with the understanding and co-operation of administering Powers, and that under the usual pattern a former colonial Territory enjoyed the blessings of its former administering Power with an assurance that their future relations would continue to be cordial and friendly against the background of their long and special historical and cultural ties. 121. In the light of such a tendency, what occurred between France and the Comoros very shortly after the latter's independence surprised all of us. We were per· 123. The Foreign Minister of the Comoros stated: "I should like to state before this Assembly that any time the opportunity is given us we shall give proof of this desire for dialogue which for my Government has become a doctrine and a method of action." [28th meeting, para. 39.] 125. My delegation sincerely hopes that the dialogue between the Comoros and France will be resumed as soon as possible and will bring about an amicable and mutually acceptable solution.