S/34/PV.12 Security Council

My delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1, on the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, in consistency with its unswerving policy of support for the process of decolonization being carried out by the United Nations. 6. However, the letter addressed yesterday by the representative of the United Kingdom to the President of the Security Council’ provides this Assembly with information that might perhaps modify the wording in some paragraphs of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1, even in its revised form, since everything would appear to indicate that the state of rebellion and illegality of the Territory in question has ended. 7. Consequently, my delegation wishes to place on record its reservations, in so far as the evolution of events has lessened the relevance of the paragraphs in the draft resolution relating to Southern Rhodesia. 8. ifr. MacKAY (Canada): My Government has been encouraged by the very real progress which has taken place in the Lancaster House talks and by the seemingly successful efforts of all parties to resolve a most delicate and difficult problem. 9. While there is no question as to Canada’s continuing support for independence for colonized countries, it regrets the failure of draft resolution A/34/ L.51/Rev.} to give due recognition to the positive developments that have occurred in Zimbabwe- Rhodesia following upon, and in accordance with, the S/13688. 10. Canada will therefore change its long-standing position of support for the draft resolution on this agenda item and will vote against it, as an indication of the support of my Government for the current efforts to achieve an effective and durable solution in one of the most difficult situations relating to the granting of independence to a colony and to its people. Il. Mr. BARRERA (Guatemala) (interpretation from Spanish): Guatemala will vote in favour of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1 concerning agenda item 18. 12. Guatemala would like to reaffirm its solidarity with the just struggle for independence of the peoples under the colonial yoke and its repudiation of any form of colonialism or neo-colonialism that still exists today. 13. Nevertheless, my delegation would like to express its reservation with regard to operative paragraph 4, because we consider that the use of force cannot be endorsed in this body whose task is to maintain international peace and security and to settle disputes by peaceful means.

In the light of our support for General Assembly resolutions 1514 (XV) and 2621 (XXV), Ireland has supported draft resolutions under this agenda item whenever possible in order to reaffirm our support for the principle of decolonization and the work of the United Nations in this field. We shall again support draft resolution A/34/L.52/Rev.1, so as to underline the deeply held views of the Government and people of Ireland on the unacceptability of foreign domination over and exploitation of colonial peoples in any part of the world. 15. Des ite reservations on a number of elements in draft resolutions similar to draft resolution A/34/L.51/ Rev.1, my delegation has given support to such drafts at past sessions of the General Assembly. However, given that operative paragraph 9 and the related preambular paragraph in this year’s draft resolution do not fully take into account the recent developments aimed at securing an early and peaceful settlement of the question cf Southern Rhodesia, and given its continuing reservations on other points enunciated in its explanation of vote on resolution 32/42 during the thirty-second session,? my delegation has reluctantly concluded that it should abstain on draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1.

The Austrian delegation will vote in favour of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1 as a token of our country’s traditional commitment to the process of decolonization and in appreciation of the key role which the United Nations is playing in this historic process. 17. We have, however, two serious reservations with regard to the wording of this draft resolution which means. 18. Our second and even more serious reservation is connected with the wording of operative paragraph 9, wherein reference is made to *' the illegal racist minority régime in Southern Rhodesia’’. In the opinion of the Austrian delegation—and, I believe, of many other delegations as well—Southern Rhodesia has now reverted to the status of a British colony and is in the process of transition to freedom and independence as a sovereign nation. It is extremely regrettable that the sponsors of the draft resolution, for reasons which are beyond our comprehension, have failed to take these latest developments into consideration and have thus closed the door to a wide or even universal consensus on action against the Government of South Africa, with which this operative paragraph should exclusively deal. 19. Formulations such as the one used in operative paragraph 9 with reference to Rhodesia, which are in flagrant contradiction to the political and legal realities, can only detract from the applicability of resolutions adopted by the General Assembly and thus render a disservice to the important function of the United Nations in general, and to the decolonization process in particular.

My delegation would like to recall that we did not take part in the vote that allowed the adoption of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV). In particular, the French Government still believes it does not fall within the competence of the General Assembly to determine the status of a Territory. My delegation considers, moreover, that the French Republic does not contain any Territory to which resolution 1514 (XV) could be applied. 21. In another connexion, the text of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1 which is before us includes a number of elements which, in our view, are not in line with reality. Therefore, my delegation will vote against draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1 and will abstain in the vote on draft resolution A/34/L.52/Rev.1.

I should like to explain my delegation’s vote on draft resolutions A/34/L.51/ Rev.1 and A/34/L.52/Rev.1. My delegation will vote in favour of the two draft resolutions. I wish, however, to draw attention to operative paragraph 9 of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1. That operative paragraph uses the phrase ‘‘the illegal racist minority régime in Southern Rhodesia’’. The use of such language is, in the view of my delegation, inconsistent with the latest development in Zimbabwe-Southern Rhodesia.

For decades the United States has been in the forefront of those favouring the process of decolonization. My 24. This has been an important year in the process of decolonization. We have welcomed the independence of the new nations of Saint Lucia, Kiribati and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. With the arrival of a British Governor in Rhodesia and his reassumption of authority, an important step has been taken on the long-sought-for transfer of powers to the majority in that country. We believe the international community should continue to encourage the parties at the Lancaster House conference to reach a final agreement on a process that will lead to an independent Zimbabwe. On Namibia, we and the other members of the five Western States are fully committed to working for an internationally acceptable solution leading to the genuine independence of Namibia. 25. The United States agrees with the basic goal of draft resolution A/34/L..51/Rev.1 on the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. We believe that the right of self-determination is the right of a people to determine for themselves the status they should have. We believe that there should be no preconceived notion as to what status any Territory should achieve, except that it should correspond to the freely expressed wishes of the local population. We wish to note for the record that apartheid policies of Soutn Africa, notwithstanding our opposition to them on other grounds, are not properly an issue of decolonization. 26. With this said, my country finds it regrettable and a matter of grave concern that we must vote against this basic draft resolution on the process of decolonization. We do so because we feel this draft resolution as it is drafted no longer accurately reflects the challenge of decolonization facing the international community in the decade ahead. We believe that the resolutions of the General Assembly must change to take account of changing situations, or they will lose their significance and detract from the effectiveness of this Organization. For example, given the agreements reached at the Lancaster House conference, it would appear to my delegation that this draft resolution should have taken note of the Lancaster House decisions and avoided commentary that might interfere with the implementation of an agreed settlement in Rhodesia. 27. I shall now deal with my Government's specific reservations on draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1. The Assembly is familiar with the arguments that my Government adduces against certain elements of this draft resolution, as we have stated our position here in the plenary Assembly many times before. However, let me once again emphasize that the United States objects to the use of Chapter VII language in operative paragraph 2 of the draft resolution. In addition, my country cannot support the suggestion contained in operative paragraph 4 that even terrorism may be a legitimate means of bringing about political change. nor can we Pacific Islands [ibid., chap. XX], both subjects that are beyond the scope of the Committee’s authority. 28. The Special Committee’s resolution selectively interprets resolution 1514 (XV) as requiring the complete transfer of all powers without any reference to the wishes of the people of Puerto Rico, a demand by a United Nations body that may be unprecedented. 29. I should add in passing that the references to Puerto Rico this morning by the representative of Cuba [/0!st meeting, paras. 205-220] were both inappropriate to the occasion and seriously misleading as to the true situation in Puerto Rico. Both the President and the Congress of the United States have made perfectly clear my Government’s full support for Puerto Rican self-determination. Puerto Rico enjoys afree, democratic society; its people are free to choose their future. The leaders of all political parties function freely. It is ludicrous for the representative of a country where free elections are forbidden, opposition political parties banned and the press rigidly controlled, to try to preach to others on such matters. 30. As to the Special Committee’s discussion of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, we wish to point out once again that authority has been delegated by the Security Council to the Trusteeship Council to consider the matter of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. It is the Trusteeship Council to which consideration of this question properly belongs. 31. With regard to operative paragraph 7 of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1, the United States shares the view that foreign economic activities that impede the free expression of the right to self-determination should be condemned. We do not believe that foreign economic interests in Non-Self-Governing Territories can be generally so categorized. 32. i must emphasize that my delegation regards the collaboration with South Africa, described in operative paragraph 8, as having reference only to those activities that are prohibited in terms of Security Council resolution 418 (1977); my Government condemns such activities, as do I. 33. In its operative paragraphs 6, 9 and 11, the draft resolution invites and indeed seeks to sanction the politicization of the specialized agencies. The introduction of extraneous and divisive political issues into the work of these technical bodies is in direct contravention of their essential purpose and is a major hindrance to them in meeting their vital international responsibilities. My Government cannot accept language which gives further incitement to this destructive practice. 34, Finally, with respect to operative paragraph 10. our views are also well known. The United States is 35. The United States supports draft resolution A/34/ L.52/Rev.! on the dissemination of information on decolonization because of our over-all support for the process of self-determination and decolonization. We have reservations, however, concerning the language of the report of the Special Committee on this subject, language which is approved by this draft resolution and which calls for greater publicity to be given to such items as the role of foreign economic and other interests in Non-Self-Governing Territories. We have illustrated our opposition to the view of the majority on such items by our speeches and votes in the Fourth Committee and in this body.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolutions A/34/L.51/Rev.1 and Add.1 and A/34/L.52/Rev.1! and Add.1. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of these two draft resolutions is contained in document A/34/823. 37. We shall vote first on draft resolution A/34/L.51/ Rev.! and Add.f entitled ‘‘Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples’’, a recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. in favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Vene- 7uela Viet Nam Yemen Yuonslavia Zaire Zambia Abstaining: Ireland, Israel, Italy. Liberia,* Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal. The draft resolution was adopted by 125 votes to 7, with 7 abstentions (resolution 34/94).4

We shall now proceed to a vote on draft resolution A/34/L.52/Rev.1 and Add.1, entitled ‘“‘Dissemination of information on decolonization’’. A recorded vote has been requested, A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary. Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius. Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of. America, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: None. Abstaining: Belgium, France, Luxembourg, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The draft resolution was adopted by 137 votes to none, with 4 abstentions (resolution 34/95).4 * The delegation of Liberia subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wished to have its vote recorded as having been in favour of the draft resolution. * The delegations of Nicaragua and Sierra Leone subsequently informed the Secretariat that they wished to have their votes recorded as having been in favour of the draft resolution. = The delegation of Sierra Leone subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wished to have its vote recorded as having been in faunnr of the draft racolutinn 41. The Nordic Governments have consistently and actively supported the decolonization process. They will continue to contribute to the efforts of the United Nations to eradicate colonialism and help colonial peoples to achieve their inalienable right to selfdetermination. They will continue to give moral and material support to the colonial peoples in order to help them to fulfil their aspirations to self-determination and independence. The Nordic countries recognize the special responsibility of the United Nations in the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and they have voted in favour of draft resolution A/34/ L.51/Rev.1 because they share the main objectives of that draft resolution. 42. The Nordic countries have reservations. however, concerning some of the paragraphs contained in draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1, just adopted. We wish to point out that operative paragraph 4 contains a formulation which may be considered contrary to the principle upheld by the Nordic countries that the United Nations should seek peaceful solutions. We also have reservations concerning certain other paragraphs, some of which may seem to run counter to the principle of universality which our delegations continue to uphold. Furthermore, the Nordic countries regret that operative paragraph 9 does not reflect the constitutional development that has taken place with regard to Southern Rhodesia during the past few days.

My Government remains fully committed to the early and complete implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. The Netherlands therefore attaches the greatest importance to the work of the Special Committee. We would have liked to vote in favour of draft resolution A/34/L.51/ Rev.1, but certain elements in this draft resolution have unfortunately compelled us to abstain from voting. 44. I must express in this regard our disappointment that this draft resolution fails to take into account in a more positive way the important developments which have taken place concerning Southern Rhodesia. We are all aware of the contributions made by the various parties to the results achieved so far in the Lancaster House negotiations and we think that this should be acknowledged in the resolutions of the United Nations. Southern Rhodesia is one of the last remaining colonial Territories and certainly one of the most important and we felt justified in expecting that the text would have reflected the new political situation in Southern Rhodesia created by the British Governor's assumption of his duties. 45. In this connexion we have to dissociate ourselves. in particular, from the reference in operative paragraph 9 to the ‘‘illegal racist minority régime in Southern Rhodesia’. Also, the text might have 46. Furthermore, my delegation has to reserve its position on certain other paragraphs, our objections to which are clearly on record already.

The Turkish delegation voted in favour of the draft resolutions contained in documents A/34/L.51/Rev.1 and A/34/L.52/Rev.1, in keeping with its traditional position on questions relating to decolonization. We should, however, like to place it on record that, in our view, some of the references to Southern Rhodesia in draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1 do not adequately reflect the recent encouraging developments in this regard.

My delegatien voted in favour of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1, which has just been adopted, because of our firm support for the basic objective set forth in it; namely; a reaffirmation of the inalienable right of the peoples of Non- Self-Governing Territories to self-determination and independence. However, for the reasons we have made clear many times before, my delegation wishes to record reservations on some paragraphs.of that draft resolution.

Australia has given consistent support to resolutions in this Assembly on the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. We have accordingly voted at this session in favour of draft resolutions A/34/L.51/Rev.1 and A/34/L.52/Rev.1. 50. In relation to the situation in Rhodesia. the Australian Government hopes and expects that the people of Zimbabwe will very shortly be able, as a result of the Conference at Lancaster House, to determine their own future and to achieve full independence under genuine majority rule. In this regard, I would note that certain references to Rhodesia contained in the original draft resolution have been overtaken by events. The amendments to that original draft resolution that have been incorporated in document A/34/L.51/Rev.1 to take account of these developments do not, we feel, go far enough and are still. to our mind, inappropriate.

My delegation voted in favour of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1 because, as in past years, we fully support the principles on which it is based. None the less, we wish to express reservations on operative paragraphs 4 and 9 of that draft resolution. Operative paragraph 9, in particular, does not take due account of the positive development of events in respect of Southern Rhodesia. 52. Mr. MATHIAS (Portugal) (interpretation from French}: My delegation would have liked to vote in favour of draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1. just as it voted in favour of draft resolution A/34/L.52/Rev.1, because we fully support the spirit in which those texts have been drafted and the principles they contain. Nevertheless, we must emphasize that we were compelled to abstain in the vote on draft resolution A/34/

My delegation voted in favour of draft resolutions A/34/L.51/Rev.i and A/34/L.52/ Rev.1, which have just been adopted, because we support the principle of self-determination. Nevertheless, my delegation does not agree with everything contained in operative paragraph 9 of draft resolution A/34/L.51/ Rev.1. The paragraph does not take account of the results of the Lancaster House Conference on Rhodesia. Hence, we must express reservations on operative paragraph 9, inasmuch as we support any kind of peaceful solution to the Rhodesian problem. 54, . The PRESIDENT: [ now call on the representative of Trinidad and Tobago, the Acting Chairman of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, who wishes to make a statement. 55. Mr. ABDULAH (Trinidad and Tobago), Acting Chairman of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples: It has been rather surprising to hear the criticisms levelled at draft resolution A/34/ L.51/Rev.1, which has just been adopted, in regard to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. The sponsors of the draft resolution had sought to accommodate what was clearly a difficult situation, since there were differing views on the question. 56. In any case, as lam sure the Assembly is aware, the Lancaster House Conference has not yet ended. Indeed, there has been no official report to this Assembly on the results of the Conference. As a matter of fact, the Assembly has still to consider the item on Southern Rhodesia. There will be an opportunity at that time—assuming that the necessary information is brought to the Assembly—to take fully into account any final settlement that may by then have been agreed upon by all the parties participating in the Conference. I can only say that the fact that, in spite of the criticisms we have heard here this afternoon, there has been such overwhelming support for draft resolution A/34/L.51/Rev.1 is a sufficient answer to those criticisms.

There remain two matters concerning the present agenda item which | should like to bring to the Assembly's attention. 58. First, document A/34/617 contains a letter addressed to the President of the General Assembly regarding the decision of the Government of Sweden to withdraw from membership of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, as from 31 December 1979. I should like to nominate Denmark as a member of the Special Committee with effect from It was so decided (decision 34{310 (a)).

Secondly, document A/34/799 contains a letter informing the President of the General Assembly that, subject to the concurrence of the Assembly, it is the wish of the Government of Venezuela to rejoin the Special Committee as from January 1980. May I take it that the General Assembly decides to increase the membership of the Special Committee from 24 to 25? It was so decided (decision 34/325).

I therefore nominate Venezuela as a member of the Special Committee as from 1 January 1980. May I take it that the Assembly confirms that nomination? It was so decided decision 34/310 (b)).

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolutions and draft decisions recommended by the Second Committee in paragraphs 18 and 19 of its report. The positions of delegations with respect to the recommendations contained in the report of the Second Committee to the Assembly are reflected in the relevant summary records of the Committee, 66. May I remind members of the decision taken by the General Assembly on 21 September 1979 that ‘‘when the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in the plenary Assembly, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, that is, either in the Committee or in the plenary Assembly, unless that delegation’s vote in the plenary Assembly is different from its vote in the Committee.”’ [4th meeting, para. 349.] 67. I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes before the vote, reminding them at the same time that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and are to be delivered from the delegation seats.

Today the General Assembly must face squarely an issue which has the potential to undermine the foundation of the United Nations. Operative paragraph 14 of draft resolution III in document A/34/805 has behind it a very short, but turbulent history. A similar paragraph was adopted by consensus, as part of the resolution on science and technology in the General Assembly last year, as paragraph 7 of resolution 33/192. At the same time, my delegation made a statement before the draft resolution was adopted concerning the United Nations role in funding and servicing restricted membership meetings of specific groups in preparation for United Nations conferences.°® 69. It was the view of my Government then, as it is now, that regional meetings or caucuses of groups of restricted memberships can be supported by United Nations funding and associated services if they are in direct preparation for, and are held immediately prior to, the convening of a major United Nations conference. Moreover, such meetings should be convened either at the conference site or at Headquarters. 70. Operative paragraph 7 of draft resolution III, with its financial implications, clearly envisages a major conference for one exclusive political economic group fully one month prior to the Third General Conference 71. The United States delegation considers these proposals for limited meetings of exclusive groups to be in conflict with the principle of universality of membership in the United Nations and not in accord with established procedures and practices, and if this practice continues, it will have serious consequences for the viability of the United Nations as an institution that serves the interests of all delegations. It is on this basis that my delegation requests a vote on operative paragraph 14 of draft resolution III in document A/34/805, and states that we will vote against that operative paragraph.

The General Assembly is going to hold a separate vote on operative paragraph 14 of draft resolution III in document A/34/805. For our part, we are unable to vote in favour of this paragraph for one basic reason. Indeed, we would have preferred a precise statement that the interregional meetings concerned would be held under the auspices and according to the procedures of the United Nations in one of the Organization’s headquarters or in connexion with the Third General Conference of UNIDO, that is, at New Delhi. 73. In operative paragraph 14 as it now stands, the principles of the universality of the United Nations and the equality of its Members, which form the basis of the Organization's functioning, are not respected. In fact, there is a request to use the Organization's budget to finance activities from which some of its Members are excluded or to which they have no access. In the past, exceptions have been made in specific cases and for precise reasons. However, we are fearful that this might gradually become the rule. 74. The rest of the draft resolution is acceptable to us; we even welcome its content. We are delighted by the spirit which prevailed in the work of the informal group and the desire to reach as broad a consensus as possible. 75. After the vote on operative paragraph 14, it would be natural for us to reject the consensus, request a vote on the draft resolution as a whole and abstain in that vote. 76. However, as an exception, we shall not request such a vote and stand in the way of a consensus, so as to demonstrate our good will and not to impair the over-all result of our work. However. it goes without saying that some of the provisions of operative paragraph 14 must not constitute a precedent.

I invite members to turn their attention to draft resolution I, entitled **Transitional atrangements on the establishment of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization as a specialized agency’. The Second Committee adopted draft resolution I without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 34]97).

We come now to draft resolution III, entitled **Industrial development co-operation and the Third General Conference of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization’. The report of the Fifth Committee on the administrative and financial implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/34/816. 80. A separate vote has been requested on operative paragraph 14. A, recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin. Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Burma, Burundi, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt. Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada. Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India. Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jamaica. Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania. Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia. Against: Belgium, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Buigaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, El Salvador, Finland, German Democratic Republic, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland. Ireland. Israel, Mauritius, Mexico,’ Mongolia, Netherlands. New Zealand, Norway. Poland, Portugal, Spain. Sweden, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Operative paragraph 14 was adopted by 106 votes to 8, with 28 abstentions.* 7 The delegation of Mexico subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wished to have its vote recorded as having been in favour of operative paragraph 14. * The delegation of Sierra Leone subsequently informed the Secretariat that it wished to have its vote recorded as having been in favour of operative paragraph 14. Draft resolution HI as a whole was adopted (resolution 34/98).

We now iurn to draft decision I, in paragraph 19 of the report. It is entitled **Report of the Industrial Development Board on the work of its thirteenth session”’ [4/34//6]. The Second Committee adopted it without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft decision I was adopted (decision 34/426).

Lastly, we turn to draft decision II, entitled "Industrial redeployment in favour of developing countries’. The Second Committee aodpted it without a vote. May I consider that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft decision I was adopted (decision 34/427).

As members are aware, the Fifth Committee is expected to report on the draft resolution entitled *‘United Nations Industrial Development Organization’? [A/C.2/34/L.32]. which the Second Committee, at its 49th session, referred to it for further consideration.’

The General Assembly will now resume the election of one non-permanent member of the Security Council from the group of Latin American States for a two-year term beginning on 1 January 1980. 86. Following the inconclusive ballots held at its 47th, 48th, 50th, 53rd, 83rd, 89th, 90th and 98th plenary meetings, held on 26 and 30 October, 2 and 29 November and 5 and 11 December, the Assembly will now proceed, in accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure, to the next ballot, which is the seventyfirst ballot. 87. This ballot will be the first of a series of unrestricted ballots. In this unrestricted ballot, any State member of the group of Latin American States may be a candidate for election except. of course, Bolivia, which is about to vacate its seat, and Jamaica, which is already a member of the Security Council. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the president, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celihkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. The meeting was suspended at 4.25 p.m. and resumed at 4.35 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 145 Invalid ballots: I Number of valid ballots: 144 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 142 Required majority: 95 Number of votes obtained: Cuba .. cece cece cece rece n eee een eeee 79 Colombia 2.0... .. cece cece eee 63

Since no country has obtained the required majority in the first of this series of unrestricted ballots, we shall now proceed to the second unrestricted ballot on the same terms and conditions. The ballot papers will now be distributed, At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 4.40 p.m. and resumed at 4.50 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 146 Invalid ballots: I Number of valid ballots: 145 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 143 Required majority: 96 Number of votes obtained: Cuba ... 2. cece eee cece eee ee eee 82 Colombia .........0 00. cece eee eens 60 VA | I

As the second unrestricted ballot has proved inconclusive, we shall now proceed to the third unrestricted ballot and, as before, in this unrestricted ballot any State member of the group of Latin American States may be a candidate for election except, of course, Bolivia and Jamaica. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. Number of ballot papers: .. 146 Invalid ballots: - 0 Number of valid ballots: 146 Abstentions: I Number of members voting: 145 Required majority: 97 Number of votes obtained: Cuba ........ cece eee eee ee oo. = 85 Colombia ............0.--.0-6- Lees 57 Chile 2.0.0... ccc cece eee eee eee l bao) | | Surimame .......-. eee e eee eee eeee ]

Since the third unrestricted ballot has proved inconclusive, in accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure, the General Assembly will now proceed to the first in a series of three restricted ballots. The only candidates eligible are the two countries that have obtained the largest numbers of votes, namely, Cuba and Colombia. Any ballot paper containing the name of any country other than that of Cuba or Colombia will be declared invalid. The ballot papers will now be distributed. Al the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 5.20 p.m, and resumed at 5.30 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 148 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 148 Abstentions: I Number of members voting: 147 Required majority: 98 Number of votes obtained: Cuba... eee tee ee ene 88 Colombia ........... 0. eee eee eee 59

As neither of the two countries obtained the required two-thirds majority, the General Assembly will continue the voting and will hold a second restricted ballot. As in the last ballot, the only countries whose names may be included in the ballot papers are Cuba and Colombia. Any papers containing the names of other countries will be declared invalid. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 147 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 147 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 145 Required majority: 97 Number of votes obtained: Cuba .. oe eee ccc ee ree ee ee naee 91 Colombia 2.0... . cece cece eee eee e wees 55

As neither of the countries obtained the required two-thirds majority, the General Assembly will continue the voting and will hold a third restricted ballot under the same terms and conditions. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkal (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 5.55 p.m. and resumed at 6.25 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 149 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 149 Abstentions: 1 Number of members voting: 148 Required majority: 99 Number of votes obtained: OT: 9] Coloinbia ...... 0... cece eee ee eee eee 57

Before we proceed to the next ballot, I should like to explain that there has been an error in calculation in respect of the previous ballot, the second restricted ballot in this series. The results of the voting should have read: Number of ballot papers: 148 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 148 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 146 Required majority: 98 Number of votes obtained: Cuba 2.2.2 cece ec cece cece eee 9] Colombia ........... cece eee cece eee 55

I should like to appeal to all delegations to make sure that they cast their votes 107. In view of the fact that the third restricted ballot has proved inconclusive, in accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure the General Assembly will now proceed to a series of unrestricted ballots. In this series of unrestricted ballots, any State member of the group of Latin American States, with the exception of Bolivia and Jamaica, is eligible for election. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 6.35 p.m. and resumed at 6.45 p.m. Mr. Makeka (Lesotho), Vice-President, took the Chair.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 149 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 149 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 147 Required majority: 98 Number of votes obtained: Cuba oo... ccc cee cence eens 89 Colombia ............0 2c eee cece eee 58

As neither of the countries obtained the required two-thirds majority, the General Assembly will continue the voting and will hold a second unrestricted ballot under the same terms and conditions. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 6.55 p.m. and resumed at 7.05 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 145 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of votes obtained: Cuba... ccc cece cece cee een aeee 86 Colombia ........... ccc cece cece eee 57

As the second unrestricted ballot has proved inconclusive, we shall now proceed to the third unrestricted ballot and, as before, in this unrestricted ballot any State member of the group of Latin American States may be a candidate for election except, of course, Bolivia and Jamaica. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 7.10 p.m. and resumed at 7.25 p.m. Number of ballot papers: 145 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 145 Abstentions: } Number of members voting: 144 Required majority: 96 Number of votes obtained: CUBA 2. cece cece eens 82 Colombia ....... 2... e eee e eee eee 62

In view of the inconclusive nature of today’s voting, and bearing in mind the importance which the General Assembly should attach to this uuestion and the need for more reflection on the part of members, I propose to adjourn the meeting now. At some time in fie course of our meeting tomorrow afternoon, I will announce when we shall proceed with the next round of balloting. The meeting rose at 7.30 p.m.