S/PV.2190 Security Council

It is a pleasure for me, on behalf of the Council, to bid the warmest possible welcome to our colleague Mr. Muiioz Ledo, the representative of Mexico, a country which the General Assembly has, in accordance with Article 23 of the Charter of the United Nations, just elected a non-permanent member of the Council. Mr. Muiioz Ledo requires no introduction from me. In a very short time he has earned the esteem and admiration of everyone at the United Nations. As a statesman, diplomat and author, he will bring to our work the fruits of a considerable and varied experience. He represents a country whose contribution to the ideals of the United Nations is well known. I hope he will accept my best wishes for total success in his mission here among us.

Mr. President, I thank you for your words of welcome. They are particularly pleasing to hear because they come from a diplomat of such great qualities, one who represents France, with which Mexico shares essential values. 3. I thank all members for the warm welcome they have given me personally, and I am sure that my country’s delegation and they will work well together. We have come here today to occupy one of the two seats reserved for Latin America in this forum, a responsibility that has been most ably discharged by Bolivia during the past two years. 4. Returning to the Council after 34 years, Mexico wishes to say that it is unswervingly devoted to the ideals and principles of the Charter and that it will offer this principal body of the United Nations its forthright and complete co-operation. Adoption of the agenda Letter dated 3 January 1980 addressed to the President of the Security Council by the representatives of Australia, the Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Germany, Federal Republk of, Greece, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Liberia, Luxembourg, Malaysia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papa New Guinea, the Philippines, Portugal, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America, Uruguay and Venezuela (S/13724 and Add.1 and 2)

In accordance with decisions taken at the 2185th to 2189th meetings, I invite the representatives of Afghanistan, Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Egypt, the Federal Republic of Germany, Hungary, Italy, Japan, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Liberia, Malaysia, Mongolia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Pakistan, Panama, Poland, Saudi Al the invitation of the President, Mr. Dosl (A.fglmnistcrn), Mr. Anderson (Austr-alicc), Mr. Yattko\* (Bulgnria), Mr. Barton (Catmla), Mr. Canales (Chile), Mr. LiPwno (Colombia), Mr. Pizn Escalante (Costa Rica), Mr. Hulinsk$ (Czeckoslosakia), Mr. Thiounn Prasith (Detnocrrttic Kampuchea), Mr. Ahdel Meguid (Egypt), Baron van Wechtwr (Germany, Federal Republic of), Mr. Hollai (Hungary), Mr. Ls Rocca (I~nly), Mr. Nisihori (Japnn), Mr. Southichak (LOO People’s Democratic Republic), Mr. Tulman (Liberitt), Mr. Zaiton (Malaysia), Mr. Dashrseren (Mongolia), Mr. Boddens-Hosang (Nerherlands), Mr. Francis (New Zenlanci), Mr. Naik (Pakistan), Mr. Illueca (Ptttwma), Mr. Jaroszek (Poland), Mr. Allaguny (Saudi Arabia), Mr. Koh (Singapore), Mr. Sharif (Sotnnlia), Mr. Pinie’s (Spain), Mr. Eralp (Turkey), Mr. Nava Casrillo (Venezuela), Mr. Hn Van Latr (Vier Nctm) and Mr. Kotnatina (Yugoslavia) took the places reserved for rhetn af the side of the Council chamber.

The first speaker is the representative of Panama. I invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, at the outset I should like to thank you and the other members of the Council for giving my delegation this opportunity to participate in the debate. For the past two years, it has been my singular honour to work with you in the Council, and I wish to join in the expressions of admiration and respect that have been offered to you by the international community. I should add that France and Panama have deep-rooted historical, spiritual and cultural ties. In congratulating you upon your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council, I wish to pledge to you our co-operation and to express our best wishes for success in your work. We wish to pay a tribute to Mr. Chen Chu of China, for his outstanding work as President of the Council for the month of December. We also wish to commend the Secretary-General, whose co-operation with the Council is well known. Only recently, hiS very life was endangered in the performance of his duties. 8. It is with pleasure that I congratulate the representatives of the German Democratic Republic, the Philippines, the Niger and Tunisia, which have this yearjoined the Council as new members, together with Mexico, which this morning the General Assembly elected by an overwhelming majority to fill one of the two Latin American seats in the Council. 9. In addition, we express our appreciation to the representatives of Bolivia, Czechoslovakia, Gabon, Kuwait and Nigeria for their important work as members of the Council. Their mandate ended on 31 December 1979. 11. Not only my country, but the entire Latin American continent was deeply saddened to learn that the people of Afghanistan had been invaded by huge contingents of troops from the Soviet Union, whose offensive capacity exceeds the limits of the territory occupied, Grave concern has been aroused. We were particularly dismayed to learn that with the help of the very troops which had come to its aid, the Government of Afghanistan had been overthrown, the Head of State executed, the territorial integrity of the country wholly violated and the army disarmed and that, at the very time when the Council was meeting, Soviet forces of occupation were carrying out combat operations and firing on dissident segments of the population of Afghanistan, causing a deplorable loss of human life, actions that the human conscience can only repudiate and condemn. 12. In the course of the debate, it has been asserted that the overwhelming Soviet presence in Afghanistan has a certain legitimacy by virtue of provisions of the Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighbourliness and Cooperation between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan signed in Moscow on 5 December 1978.’ In that regard, it has been claimed that Soviet military assistance was requested under that Treaty by the Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, headed by Hafizullah Amin, who, as is well known, was executed during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. 13. That flimsy excuse is entirely unacceptable, not only because it is irrational and illogical, but also because the international community has not conferred -nor can it confer-any legal validity on interventionist provisions or provisions authorizing the arbitrary use of armed forces in the territory of another State that may be inserted or may have been inserted in treaties or international agreements by any Members of the United Nations after the entry into force of the Charter. 14. Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations leaves no room for doubt in that regard. That Article states: “In the event of a conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under the 15. It should be pointed out in this connection that the International Law Commission, in drafting the text which later became article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties,z took into consideration that a number of countries from various regions and with different legal systems referred to Article 103 of the Charter as a formal norm of jlls cogerjs. Article 53 of the Vienna Convention certainly puts into perspective the so-called Treaty of Friendship signed by the Soviet Union and Afghanistan. Article 53 states: “A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law. For the purposes of the present Convention, a peremptory norm of general international law is a norm accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character.” 16. No one is unaware of the fact that, as the most distinguished contemporary jurists have agreed, most of the Articles of the Charter of the United Nations in fact contain typical provisions of constitutional law and that in those Articles there may be found many provisions which are noteworthy because they do not refer solely to matters of procedure, but also create rights and obligations. 17. That is the case-so frequently mentioned as an example by contemporary jurists-with Article 2, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Charter, which refer to the peaceful settlement of disputes and to the obligation to refrain from the threat or the use of force. 18. The Charter, as we all know, is a treaty which has been accepted now by 152 States and the legislative value which this instrument has in the international arena must be recognized, for its provisions have beeri ratified at the highest level among the community of States of the world. 19. My country upholds the legal conclusion that States Members of the United Nations are prevented under the Charter from giving legal validity to the Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighbourliness and Cooperation signed by the Soviet Union and Afghanistan, because that Treaty is in conflict with the Charter. To accept the validity of that Treaty would be tantamount to applauding the unlawful use of force in contravention of Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter, which provides that: I “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any 21. The Soviet action violates not only the Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States but also the Charter of the United Nations. That action is also in open contradiction of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples contained in General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960. It is only fair to recall that both documents originated in Soviet proposals, although they were subsequently redrafted by countries of the third world. The Soviet action also contravenes the principle of non-intervention proclaimed in the charter of the Organization of American States, the charter of the League of Arab States and the charter of the Organization of African Unity and accepted in the conferences of ‘Montevideo, Buenos Aires, Chapultepec and Bogota, in the decisions of the Asian-African Conference held at Bandung in 1955, those of the First Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries held at Belgrade in 1961, in the Programme for Peace and International Co-operation adopted at the conclusion of the Second Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries held at Cairo in 1964 and in the Declaration on the Problem of Subversion adopted at Accra in 1965 by the second ordinary session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African unity. 22. That action by the Soviet Union also contravenes many decisions by the summit conferences of nonaligned countries, and in particular the decisions of the Conferences of Colombo and Havana, The Soviet Union, in acting unilaterally and by-passing the United Nations, has come into conflict with the Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, who said at the Colombo Conference in 1976 that an end must be put to any attempt or effort to avoid or limit participation by the United Nations in the settlement of international probIems which are of concern to all countries. 23. Moreover, the Soviet action is in open violation of the statement on the interference or intervention in the internal affairs of States by the Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries at the Havana Conference in 1979. On that occasion, “The Conference reaffirmed the adherence of non-aligned countries to the principle of nonintervention and non-interference in the internal and external affairs of States, which has been one 24. The ill-advised Soviet decision to invade Afghanistan is, in my Government’s opinion, more than a breach of the legal order: it has disrupted international relations. The Soviet action has traumatized the process of international dBtente in which the world had, in recent times, placed so much hope. 25. We ask: What has happened to the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 and the Declaration on Principles Guiding Relations between Participating States, adopted by the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe-and, in particular, the seventh principle, on non-intervention in internal affairs? 26. The Soviet action not only has dealt a mortal blow to dCtente but has unnecessarily created a warlike mood in the world-a mood at variance with the ideals of peace of the Soviet Revolution, which we all respect, The visible consequences of that warlike action have been the great intensification of the arms race, with the consequent frustration for all the peaceloving States that wish to promote efforts to bring about disarmament, efforts which now seem to be lost somewhere on the distant horizon. 27. The Soviet action has, moreover, seriously disrupted international economic relations and has cast a pall over the possibilities of fulfilling the hopes of the third world for more equitable economic relations between the developing countries and the industrialized countries. Indeed, it has cast a pall over the already dark world economic picture. 28. Since Afghanistan is a non-aligned country which has been unjustly occupied by a super-Power, the Soviet action has brought about a serious crisis in the non-aligned movement. This crisis will cause a confrontation within the non-aligned system between traditionally friendly countries that now must reach decisions in accordance with the principles and purposes of non-alignment or cause considerable disruption within that movement, with most unpleasant consequences. 29. In general, a crisis of confidence has been created in the United Nations system and in the entire ambit of international relations. As for the countries which are not super-Powers, are they or are they not entitled to expect respect for the right of peoples to selfdetermination, for the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of States, for the principle of the non-use of force in international relations, for the principle of the inadmissibility of hegemonism, for the principle of territorial integrity? 31. In our opinion, the States that have the major responsibility to abide by the Charter must agree among themselves on a solution to the crisis. That need not necessarily be contained in a draft resolution; it could be contained in a consensus decision read out by the President, in accordance with the usual practice-a decision that would clearly state the elements of a solution to the crisis, including the immediate withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghan territory and a commitment by all States, both within and outside the region, not to interfere directly or indirectly with the right of the people of Afghanistan freely to decide their future and the form of their political, economic and social life and to maintain their independence and territorial integrity and their status as a non-aligned country. 32. Furthermore, we would remind the Council that article 3 (e) of the Definition of Aggression [Grr~c~crl Assenzhly resolution 3314 (XXIX), crnnex] qualifies as an act of aggression: “The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement for any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement.” 33. It is obvious that the measures taken by the Soviet troops against the people and Government of Afghanistan during the occupation constitute a violation of the very Treaty of Friendship on which the measures are alleged to be based. This is a clear case of aggression. 34. In conclusion, I should like with all due respect to make a friendly appeal to the Soviet Union to restore to the world the climate of peace for which we all yearn. To that end there must be agreement, without delay, on the immediate withdrawal of the Soviet troops now in Afghanistan. The admiration of the world for the “Red Army” is much clearer when viewed against the background of its glorious actions against nazism and fascism-as in the battle of Stalingrad-than when viewed against the background of the infamous invasion of Afghanistan.

I should like to inform members of the Council that I have just received a letter from the representative of Zaire in which he requests to be invited to participate At the irlvitrrtion of the President, Mr. Kn/?landa MW Krrmrrndrr (Zaire) took the plncr resewed for him at the side qf the Council chamber.

I invite the representative of Zaire to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

I should like at the outset, Mr. President, to extend my warm congratulations to you on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the month of January. The Republic of Zaire takes particular pleasure in seeing you presiding over the Security Council at this difficult time, not only because you are the representative of a friendly country, France, but also because you are a man of quality who combines vast experience with distinguished qualifications as a diplomat. 38. I should like also to pay a well-deserved tribute to Mr. Chen Chu, the outgoing President of the Security Council, who conducted the Council’s proceedings with skill, efficiency and assurance in particularly delicate circumstances. I would also extend my warm congratulations to all the newly elected members of the Security Council. 39. We are speaking in this debate, first, for reasons of principle and also as a member of the non-aligned movement. There can be no shadow of doubt that the situation created in Afghanistan by the armed foreign invasion constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security. This is a very serious matter in view of the violation of the principles of the Charter and in view of the nature of those concerned. There can be no responsible leader or any Government of good faith in the world that could be persuaded to believe that the regime of President Hafrzullah Amin, relying on the Treaty of Friendship and Co-operation’ linking his country with its powerful neighbour, would have invited the troops of that country to come and overthrow him and then to execute him summarily. Among civilized people there are some things which are understood, and I do not think it is at all appropriate to treat people as if they were wild animals. 40. The primary mission or the essence of law in the human community is to set useful limits to the free course of the instincts, to organize relations among its members on a rational basis in such a way as to avert conflicts, to permit all to enjoy rights and freedoms and to promote not only the progress of the community, but also that of each of its members. 42. The same goes for relations among peoples and States; otherwise there would be a free-for-all in the jungle* We would all be at the mercy of predators and wild beasts, at the mercy of the unknown; it would be a return to medieval times when the strong imposed their will on the weak. 43. In modern times we have substituted the rule of law for might in relations among men and societies, and it is for this reason that there exists ajus gentiurn, a Charter of the United Nations, international treaties and conventions-in a word, international legal instruments which govern all the aspects of relations among States. 44. It has been established, first, according to the elements we have at our disposal and in an irrefutable manner, that the invasion of Afghanistan by regular troops of a great Power is a flagrant violation of Article 2, paragraphs I to 4, of the Charter, which stipulate that: “1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members. “2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter. “3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered. “4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” 45. The invasion of Afghanistan by regular troops of a great Power, a member of the Security Council, is also a flagrant violation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security [GenelNI Assembly resolution 2734 (XXV)]; the Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of their Independence and Sovereignty [resolution 2131 (XX)]; the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations [resolution 2625 CXXV), annex]; the resolution con- “ 1. Ccrlls upon all States, in the interest of the maintenance of international peace and security, to promote good neighbourliness in their relations with other States; “2. Affirms that good neighbourliness conforms with the purposes of the United Nations and is founded upon the strict observance of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration of Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as well as the rejection of any acts seeking to establish zones of influence and domination;“. 46. Secondly, the’reason invoked or the argumentation chosen to explain, if not to justify, the armed intervention in Afghanistan is particularly disturbing, if one recalls that Rome in ancient times, in the folly of its imperialist adventure, absorbed, swallowed up and systematically subjected peoples which appealed to it for help. As everyone knows, that empire was unable to digest them all and, harassed everywhere within the confines of its empire, it ran out of breath and died of natural causes. The only merit of that lesson of history is that it exists and is available to those who are interested in history. 47. Even supposing that, in contravention of the normal rules of reason, we accept the hypothesis that the Government of Hafizullah Amin indeed appealed to a great Power within the framework of a Treaty of Friendship and Co-operation to help it resist an external enemy, as yet unidentified, the overthrow of the rkgime of Amin and his summary execution by the troops to which he had appealed for help is an act of such appalling treachery that many States throughout the world would quite rightly in future be justifiably reluctant and hesitant to sign treaties and agreements of friendship and,co-operation not only with the Soviet Union, but in general with more powerful neighbours. 48. It can be imagined that such a situation would seriously affect the mutual confidence and good faith 49. Thirdly, it is troubling to note that these flagrant violations of the principles of international law, the Charter and the relevant resolutions of the United Nations have been committed by a great Power, a great country, to which the Charter has entrusted special responsibilities, by charging it and four others -on a permanent basis, furthermore-with the maintenance of international peace and security within the Security Council. 50. All of us some day, I hope, will come to sit on this Council and later we will leave. But it seems that five States will remain permanently in the Council, because they are the very heart and soul of this organ which has the task of maintaining international peace and security. 51. Therefore, if those very members which, above all others, are entrusted with the task of maintaining international peace and security and with the role of arbiter in international disputes-not only, I believe, because of their immense economic and military might, but also because of the high moral values of their peoples and their experience of the horrors of war-should today become the causes of breach of the peace, threats to international peace and security and fomenters of troubles which appear to afford no protection to present and succeeding generations from the scourge of war which, twice in our lifetime, has brought untold sorrow to mankind, I ask you, where are we headed? 52. Fourthly, every honest man should find it repugnant to see a great country, one which is overdeveloped, overindustrialized, overpopulated and overarmed with nuclear weapons and other ever more sophisticated weapons invade a small defenceless country which is underpopulated, underdeveloped, underindustrialized and without weapons and which believed that it had found in international law, nonalignment and the Charter of the United Nations the only defence for its political institutions and its desire to live free within recognized frontiers, to pursue a policy of independence and to work for the progress of its people, free from pressure and threats. 53. The future of the world, at the dawn of the 198Os, seems full of dark foreboding. If we cease to dream of the distant future, peace in the short term and medium term, that peace towards which those of us alive today can contribute something, will not be ensured by the voluntary renunciation by States of the use of force in international relations or of big-Power rivalry. 54. The Soviet Union, intelligent and lucid in its power and generous in its principles, has accustomed us to brilliant statements that are clear, precise and straight to the point. That in this particular case, the difficult search for justification of its unwarranted presence in Afghanistan should have taken it along winding and difficult paths, from one explanation to another, each less convincing than the last, more than proves the disarray and real embarrassment in which this sad invasion of Afghanistan places the whole world. 55. We think that no State and no great Power should contribute to extending the list of the unjust invasions and aggressions of this turbulent century or associate its name with this inglorious page of world history. 56. In our statement in the First Committee, on 17 October 1979, in the debate on the inadmissibility of the policy of hegemony in international relations, we stated: “If in adhering to the spirit and the letter of the draft resolution submitted by the Soviet Union -itself one of the great Powers of the world-all the other Powers intend effectively to give us the formal and solemn assurance that henceforth an end will be put to that phenomenon in relations between peoples and nations, to open up an era of peace and harmonious co-operation based on confidence, justice, equality and freedom, then this thirty-fourth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations will write in letters of gold an illustrious page in the history of mankind, one of which future generations will be justly proud. Believe me, we shall give those who deserve it, and especially the great Powers, the credit for writing that unforgettable page in the history of mankind.“4 57. We thought therefore that, after the adoption of General Assembly resolution 34/103 on the inadmissibility of the policy of hegemonism in international relations, we were going to enter a new era of relations among States. But now this invasion of Afghanistan has brought us a bitter surprise. Beyond that invasion and all other invasions, there is the spirit of domination and the desire for power and dominance, the very foundations of the policy of hegemonism, which disturb, bother, embarrass and render insecure many States in the world, and that is what we should stigmatize and denounce when it is the work of the great Powers of the world. 58. As a non-aligned country that has shared with the Soviet Union the same principles during our national liberation struggle and that is grateful to it 59. None of the reasons invoked could justify this invasion. In any case, whether it is the torture, human rights violations and genocide of the Amin regime, or the treaties of friendship and co-operation or Afghanistan’s right to legitimate collective defence, when everyone knows that it was not threatened from outside, that are invoked, I tell you that the States represented here are becoming increasingly sceptical, if not insensitive, to the reasons which are habitually put forward in order to justify that kind of aggression.

The next speaker is the representative of Canada. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, I should like to thank the Council for giving me the opportunity to participate in this debate. I should also like to extend congratulations and good wishes to you on assuming the office of the President of the Security Council for the month of January. The Council is fortunate to have you guiding its affairs in these difficult times. 62. It is a matter of deep regret to Canada that we enter a new year and a new decade under the sombre shadows of crises, one of which has necessitated the convocation of this urgent meeting, 63. Let no one try to minimize the gravity of the situation. More than 50 nations, by requesting that the Security Council be called into session, have manifested their profound concern at the violation we have been witnessing in Afghanistan of one of the fundamental principles of the Charter of the United Nations. The Soviet invasion of an independent nation is a gross violation of international law and-equally serious in this day and age-a clear reversal of the process of decolonization begun more than a quarter of a century ago. Respect for the principles and obligations of international law is a cornerstone of the United Nations and all Members are committed to it. There cannot be one law for the Soviet Union and one for the rest of the world. Canada has had no option therefore but to associate itself with all those-and there are very many of them-who have condemned the Soviet action in Afghanistan as the blatant use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of a smaller neighbouring State. 64. We are being asked to believe that Afghanistan was threatened by outside aggression and that the military might of a great Power-the Soviet Unionwas necessary to rescue Afghanistan from its plight. Surely no one believes it-and it disappoints my Government to think either that the Soviet leaders 65. But the consequences of this military action reach beyond the fate of the Afghan people to threaten the very fabric of the international community. Half a century ago, it was a Soviet Foreign Minister who wisely warned the world that peace was indivisible. To our sorrow, we have learnt that his warning was well founded. Has the world changed? Indeed, it has become much smaller, to the extent that it is even less possible today than before for any responsible nation to act according to one set of standards in one situation and a different set of standards when it seems expedient. 66. The building of confidence is a continuous process;. it permits no interruptions. And detente is indivisible; it cannot be made to flourish in one area of the globe while it is being flouted in another. 67. It is with profound regret that we must acknowledge that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan has contributed to an erosion of a sense of international confidence and to calling into question the whole concept of detente, which depends on confidence for its effective pursuit. 68. As long as present circumstances exist, the Canadian Government cannot but be deeply concerned about the way in which the international climate is being affected. Our concerns exist on a number of levels. 69. In the first place, the Soviet invasion has had a deeply corrosive effect on the interests of the entire international community. Prospects for the early implementation of important measures of arms limitation, which all Members of the United Nations were eagerly awaiting, have dimmed. The invasion has also put in 70. Secondly, the Soviet invasion has exacerbated an already complex and difficult regional security situation and, apart from doing a grave disservice to the interests of world peace, this surely constitutes a major threat to the nations and the people of the region. Tensions have mounted, uncertainties have multiplied and the potential for further instability has increased. Above all, the path of economic development will be interrupted, and the human consequences of this are hard to measure. It is not so difficult, however, to forecast the tragedy that is being played out and undoubtedly will continue in terms of the refugee outflow. Again, as in Viet Nam and Kampuchea, it is a story of lives lost, families separated and hardship endured. We can only ask: in whose interests? 71. Finally, and all things considered, the whole system of relations between the Soviet Union and other nations will inevitably be strained and diminished. 72. The Canadian Government will be keeping the situation in Afghanistan and its consequences for the international community under close review. As a first response to the present situation, we urge that the Council condemn the Soviet Union’s role in Afghanistan and demand the withdrawal of all Soviet forces now in Afghanistan, so that the people of that country can determine their own future without the interference of any foreign Power. The achievement of this objective, we believe, is in the supreme interest of all concerned with our world’s peace and security and with the observance ofgenerally accepted norms ofcivilized international conduct.

The next speaker is the representative of Chile. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. 74. Mr. CANALES (Chile) (ini~~p,‘ettrtion jiw77 Sprrnish): Mr. President, first of all, I should like to thank you and the other members of the Council for giving the delegation of Chile an opportunity to participate in this debate. I should also like to extend our warmest congratulations to you on your assumption of the functions of President of the Security Council for the month of January. We are confident that your recognized experience and skill will be brought to bear in the work of the Council at a time of such concern for the international community. We should also commend the representative of the People’s Republic of China, Mr. Chen Chu, for the wise manner in which he conducted the proceedings of the Council during the month of December. 75. Together with many other Member States of the Organization, the Government of Chile signed the letter requesting an urgent meeting of the Council 77. Whatever may be the pretexts that are put forward to justify it, the Soviet military intervention in Afghan territory constitutes a flagrant violation of the most elementary principles of international law, which are embodied in the Charter of the United Nations and repeated in Genera1 Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV). Among them are the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of other countries and the principle of non-use of force against the political independence of other States. 78. What has happened in Afghanistan shows that the Soviet Union, notwithstanding the leadership it claims in defence of the principle of the non-use of force and in combating hegemonism and other similar principles, does not hesitate to violate those principles, disregarding the most elementary rules of international life, whenever it suits its totalitarian interests. 79. Who can now give any credence to the Soviet Union’s lofty rhetoric regarding these principles? Who can now believe the fine words and intentions so often unfulfilled? Who can now feel safe in a world in which the precarious balance of peace has been dangerously threatened by one of the super-Powers? 80. The tragedy in Afghanistan is a clear warning to the developing nations regarding the fragility of ditente, now that one of the super-Powers has utilized its immense military might to impose its designs on smaller countries, of which it claims to be the natural ally. 81. My country, which has experienced intervention by that super-Power and by Castroism, has the undeniable moral authority to denounce this hypocritical attitude. During that sombre period in our history, the people of Chile, although the majority strongly supported freedom, was forced to undergo pressure and all kinds of intervention and interference directed by Moscow. The fact that we freed ourselves from that sinister intervention has forced my country to have to deal with a campaign of lies, slander and distortions akin to what is now associated with the ,brazen Soviet intervention in Afglianistan. 82. The situation we are witnessing today, which threatens a non-aligned country, should cause us to 83. We believe that the action of the Kremlin, as has been proved in the Council, in keeping with its political and ideological objectives, is aimed at extending its power to an embattled area of the world whose strategic importance has now been heightened by the state of the world economy. For this reason, the Government of Moscow has no hesitation in using totalitarian methods which we had thought belonged to the distant past. 84. In the light of the foregoing, it is my Government’s conviction that the United Nations-and primarily the Security Council-must convey the international community’s unanimous condemnation of the Soviet Union’s immoral action in Afghanistan. For that reason, we join those who have called vigorously for the immediate and total withdrawal of the forces of the Soviet Union, for the cessation of Soviet interference in Afghanistan’s internal affairs, and for respect by the Soviet Union and other States for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Afghanistan.

The next speaker is Mr. Shah Mohammad Dost, the Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, whom I invite to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

At the outset, I should like to express my delegation’s profound appreciation and gratitude to those representatives who have expressed their support for and solidarity with the Government and people of Afghanistan by denouncing and rejecting the measures taken by certain countries for the undue convening of the Security Council. 87. I have listened carefully to almost all the speeches given in this connection by other representatives. The speech of the United States representative, and of some others which followed the logic of the United States representative, contained no truth, but merely baseless slanders against my country, my Government and my people, and deserves outright rejection. So I will be brief and will not take much of the Council’s time. 88. The representative of the United States of America [2187lh meeriug] dwelt at length on the arrival of Soviet contingents in Kabul on different occasions and was trying to sow confusion regarding the purpose 89. As I have already made amply clear, my Government does not deny the fact of the arrival in Afghanistan of some Soviet Union army contingents. What we say is that, first, those limited contingents came to Afghanistan upon numerous requests from Afghanistan during the last two years; secondly, the new Government, upon taking power on 27 December 1979, promptly reaffirmed those requests; thirdly, the sole purpose of the limited presence of the Soviet military contingents in Afghanistan is to assist Afghanistan in removing the threats posed from abroad to the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Afghanistan and to repel foreign armed attacks and aggression against our country; fourthly, the Soviet armed forces contingents were not involved at all in the internal events of 27 December; fifthly, those contingents will not stay in Afghanistan for even one day after the reasons for calling them in cease to exist (of course, in the realization of such a step, the aims and acts of hostile foreign Powers play an important role: the sooner they give up their armed interference in Afghanistan’s affairs, the closer will be the time of their departure from Afghanistan); sixthly, the request for the dispatch to Afghanistan of the Soviet Army is entirely a bilateral issue concerning only Afghanistan and the Soviet Union within the scope of the Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighbourliness and Cooperation, signed on 5 December 1978 between the two countries,* and in full accord with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. It is in line with the interests and aspirations of the Afghan people. Afghanistan has on various occasions benefited from such assistance from the brotherly Soviet Union during its long history of relations with that country, every time with the support of the Afghan people. 90. Once, such assistance came in the first days of Afghanistan’s independence, during which the Soviet Union assisted Afghanistan with, among other things, aircraft and pilots for the defence of our country. At that time, we were facing the menace of British colonialists, and today we are facing imperialists and reaction. 91. As for the events of 27 December 1979, they were planned and carried out by the gallant Afghan army having full support of the people, under guidance from the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan. Long before the start of the national uprising against the Fascist regime of Hatizullah Amin, Babrak Karma1 was present in Afghanistan and directing the whole operation. 92. The threat to Afghanistan’s independence, national sovereignty and territorial integrity was imminent. Pakistani soil was and continues to be used as a base for such attacks against Afghanistan. Nobody can deny that fact; it is evident from reports and eyewitness accounts of foreign correspondents visiting 93. As to the point why it was not brought before the Security Council, it is all too clear that Amin, himself involved in all those plots and conspiracies and primarily responsible for all the criminal acts against the.defenceless people of Afghanistan and the country, would of course not have brought the case to the Council. Amin-the Pal Pot of Afghanistan-had transformed the whole country into a prison; he had his own mass graves and was saying that he would not care even if millions of Afghans were murdered or put in gaol. He wanted only himself and his bands of criminals to be in power and cared for nothing else. 94. One representative showed concern for Islam in Afghanistan. In this connection, I should like to say that the overwhelming majority of the Afghan people are devout and real Moslems, and they will remain so. Islam in our country is genuine and, in accordance with what AlIah Jala Ala Shanohu (God Almighty) and his holy prophet, Hazrat Mohammed Savallalah Alahu va Alihi Wassalam (Hazrat Mohammed, on whom God’s prayers are bestowed), order the Moslems to do. Our Islam is not that preached by imperialists and colonialists. After all, it was Afghanistan that disseminated Islamic teachings to the land of these so-called champions of Islam, and we taught them Islam. A delegation from another country spoke highly about Islam. That was the representative of that same country whose ruler, hobnobbing with Zionism and imperialism, betrayed Islam and the rights of the brotherly Palestinian people. Because of the anti- Islamic policy of the ruler of that same country, the whole land of Jerusalem lies under the rule of Zionism. 95. My Government has welcomed the Islamic revolution of the brotherly Iranian people against the despotic Shah’s regime supported by imperialism. The peoples of Afghanistan and Iran share a common concern at imperialistic intrigues. 96. Some representatives expressed concern that the presence of limited military contingents of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan would pose a threat to peace and stability in the region. I cannot understand the logic of such an assertion. The representative of the United States of America here said much about relations between Afghanistan and the Soviet Union. I should like to remind the Council that it is the United States which has sent its warships, aircraft carriers and troops thousands of kilometres away from its territory, in complete disregard of the threat it poses to the national sovereignty of small States; it is the United States which has thousands of military bases on the soil of other countries, in some cases maintained against the will of their peoples; and it is the 97. It is evident that the United States wants to expedite arms shipments to Pakistan on the pretext that Pakistan is being allegedly threatened. There is, of course, no justification for arms shipments to Pakistan. If Pakistan continues to arm itself to the teeth, then there is no course left open to Afghanistan except to think seriously about its defence and, naturally, to act accordingly. The peoples of Afghanistan and Pakistan have many things in common. The new Government in Afghanistan has extended the hand of friendship to Pakistan but, unfortunately, instead of responding positively to that call of ours, the Government of Pakistan seems to have opted for another course. 98. The Government and the new leadership in Afghanistan enjoy the full support of the Afghan people and, of course, there are many reasons for that. Babrak Karma], General Secretary of the Central Committee of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan, President of the Revolutionary Council and Prime Minister, is not only well known to the Afghan people, but also known outside Afghanistan. He has dedicated himself to serving the people. In the course of his struggle to liberate the Afghan people from the clutches of despotic and hated rulers, he has on various occasions languished in gaol. Twice he has been elected to Parliament by the people of Afghanistan, where he has done much to raise the political consciousness of the people and to give them the necessary education. He was Vice-President of the Revolutionary Council and Vice-Premier during the late Noor M. Taraki’s leadership. By toppling Amin’s usurped power, Babrak Karma1 has put the Party, which had for a while been derailed by Amin from its principled course, back in the right direction. 99. The new Government has released all the political prisoners and announced the formation of a Front comprising people of all walks of life. It will adopt a new progressive and democratic constitution and arrange elections for the provincial and national assemblies in the near future. It will work hard to realize the lofty goals of the Saur revolution and to build a society free from exploitation of man by man. Afghanistan will follow its positive non-aligned policy; it will work, along with other non-aligned countries, for the Fulfilment of the goals and objectives of the movement. We stand against and condemn i;nperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, . . racism, including Zionism, and aparfheid. We support the national liberation movements. We shall continue to be active participants in the Organization of the Islamic Conference. 101. The people of Afghanistan have a long and proud history of love for their freedom and independence. We shall never compromise that, and we would not allow anyone to encroach on our independence, national sovereignty and territorial integrity. 102. The present series of meetings of the Security ’ Council cannot serve any purpose but those of propi aganda and the revival of the cold war. The draft ! resolution [S/13729] which has been circulated on this issue would, if approved, be direct interference in the internal affairs of my country, and my Government will resolutely reject it.

Mr. President, first of all may I extend to you my heartfelt congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. You represent a country with which Tunisia has long had the best relations of friendship and co-operation. The Tunisian delegation is therefore particularly pleased to see you conducting the proceedings in the Council for this period. 104. I should also like to extend my best wishes to all the other members of the Council, those which have been serving on the Council and those which, like my country, are newly elected. I wish to thank all representatives who have been kind enough to welcome my delegation and my country. Tunisia will spare no effort in making its contribution to the quest for peace and security in the world in keeping with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. 105. The Council has before it a question of special seriousness, one that threatens peace and security in central Asia. Deeply concerned over recent developments in Afghanistan, on 31 December 1979 my Government made the following statement: “Tunisia, a non-aligned country, has always worked for the right of peoples and countries to choose the government and rCgime that suits them, for otherwise the independence and sovereignty of States would be a dead letter and the Charter of the United Nations would be without value. “Deeply concerned over the situation in Afghanistan, the Tunisian Government cannot remain indifferent to the armed intervention contrary to international law of which Afghanistan has been a victim. “Therefore Tunisia, albeit desirous of maintaining relations of friendship and co-operation with the 106. Tunisia has always worked for the right of peoples and countries to choose the form of government and regime that suits them and to create for themselves the social, economic and political system they desire. Therefore we believe that no social or political considerations can justify the intervention of foreign troops in the territory of a sovereign State. 107. Nothing can excuse such intervention. The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of ‘States is one of the most important pillars of international relations. In signing the Charter, States assumed an obligation to respect that principle and to settle their differences by peaceful means. 108. Tunisia hopes that the Council will speedily reach an appropriate decision that will remove the threats that hang over Afghanistan and indeed all of central Asia, a decision that will allow the people of Afghanistan to decide on their own future in complete freedom. 109.. Mr. TROYANOVSKY (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (itzterpretrrtion from Russicrn): Before turning to the substance of the matter, the Soviet delegation would like to welcome the representative of Mexico, a country that today has taken its seat at the Security Council table. We wish the representative of Mexico success in his work in the Council. 110. “The present discussion in the Security Council has shown that none of those who initiated the raising of the “Afghanistan question” has been able to refute the clear facts of armed intervention in the internal affairs of Afghanistan by international imperialism and reaction. Nor has anyone been able to refute the fact that the intervention created a genuine danger of undermining the gains of the April revolution in Afghanistan. It was precisely that danger that compelled the Afghanistan Government to appeal for help from the Soviet Union on the basis of the Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighbourliness and Co-operation of 1978.l Therefore the attacks against Soviet military assistance to Afghanistan and the calls for it to be halted are really aimed at depriving the Afghan people of the right to determine themselves the ways and means of ensuring their own security. In practice, that would mean giving acfree hand to those forces that are striving to overthrow the new order in Afghanistan. It is obvious that there are some people who, to that end, would like to use the Security Council to legitimize the carrying out of subversive activities against the Afghan Government. Of course, plans such as these should be most categorically rejected. 111. In the Council we have heard assertions to the effect that the decision of the Soviet Union to grant the request of the Government of Afghanistan for the 112. In the statements of a number of delegations,, attempts have been made to link the introduction into Afghanistan of a limited Soviet military contingent with certain internal events which occurred in that country at the end of December. In the statement of the Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, Mr. Shah Mohammad Dost [2185th meetiug], it was demonstrated that the removal from power of Hafizullah Amin was carried out by patriotic and genuinely revolutionary elements within the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan. It was the legitimate consequence of the further development and consolidation of the April revolution, that is to say, an exclusively internal affair of the Afghan people. 113. In so far as concerns the introduction of a limited contingent of Soviet troops into Afghanistan, that was in no way linked with changes in the Afghan leadership and was carried out in response to repeated appeals from the Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan for help to repel instances of armed intervention from outside, some of which occurred also in the period when Amin was in power. 114. We cannot fail to condemn most vigorously the aim of certain representatives in the Security Council to sully the new Government of Afghanistan. At the present time that Government has embarked upon major democratic reforms which were mentioned here by the Foreign Minister of Afghanistan. In his statement, a thorough explanation was given of the significance of the measures taken by the Government of Afghanistan in the interests of the broadest masses of the population. One of the most important of those was the freeing of political prisoners. Two days ago local television showed crowds of prisoners leaving 11.5. In the programme which the Government has proclaimed, provision is also made for the repeal of all anti-democratic laws; respect for the principles of Islam; freedom of conscience, freedom of religion and freedom of worship; the observance of the principles of lawful ownership of property; and the ensuring of normal conditions for the exercise of democratic freedoms. The Government of Afghanistan intends to carry out further phases of the democratic agrarian reform to ensure the development of the cultures of all peoples and tribes in Afghanistan and other progressive measures. The carrying out of this programme will undoubtedly lead to a stabilization of the situation in the country and will ensure the vital interests of all strata of the Afghan people. 116. In circumstances of such radical reforms in the society of Afghanistan, it would appear to be the task of the United Nations to promote the creation of propitious circumstances for the implementation of this progressive policy which has been adopted by the new Government of Afghanistan and not to take any steps which might hinder that process. 117. However, the uproar-initiated primarily by the United States-in the United Nations over the “question of Afghanistan”, has been used as a pretext to justify the policy of certain circles in the West which are attempting to take the world back to the times of the cold war. It is precisely under cover of references to the Afghan question that the Government of the United States is now procrastinating over ratification of the Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (SALT II).s That dangerous trend was manifested in a decision recently imposed by the United States on Western European members of NATO to deploy on their territories new American nuclear missiles in an attempt thus to disrupt the approximate balance of forces which had been established in the world. 118. At the same time the United States is systematically pursuing a course of increasing its military expenditures and stepping up its military preparations in various parts of the world, particularly in the Near and Middle East and in the Indian Ocean. According to data published in the United States, at the beginning of 1980, out of a total of 2.1 million American military personnel, 480,700 men were stationed outside the territory of the United States itself in more than 30 countries of the world. 119. The Chinese hegemonists, who also do not find the climate of dktente to their taste, are playing an active role in the exacerbation of the situation around Afghanistan. They have more than once demonstrated their attachment to the policy of expansionism. 120. Here in the Security Council a number of delegations, apparently in view of the statement made by the President of the United States on 4 January, have expressed their concern at the fact that the future development of the international situation might move in the direction of further exacerbation of tension and the stepping up of the arms race. Tliese appeals are entirely appropriate and they should be heeded by the United States and China, whose policies are moving in precisely that direction, a direction SO dangerous for the cause of peace. 121. The Soviet Union, like other socialist countries, firmly supports the view that, in the present circumstances, every effort must be made to prevent a slipping back to the times of the cold war. International cooperation and the easing of tension between States should remain the prevailing trend in world affairs. It is precisely for this reason that we shall strive within the United Nations and elsewhere for the adoption of decisions which will consolidate that trend rather than undermine it. 122. The Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, on whose behalf the Foreign Minister, Mr. Dost, spoke here, has. clearly stated that the presence of Soviet troops on Afghan territory is vitally necessary to ensure the sovereignty and the independence of the country and to protect the gains of the people’s revolution. One can only regret that the countries which sponsored the draft resolution [S/13729] did not heed the voice of the people of Afghanistan but followed in the wake of those who do not find the present course of the Government of Afghanistan to their liking. The provision of the draft resolution on the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan is, in essence, aimed at undermining the security of the Afghan State and at opening the way for the restoration in that country of the old rbgime which has been overthrown by the people. Another provision in the draft resolution which is inadmissible is that relating to the determination of the form of government and the choice of political and social systems in Afghanistan, which in essence is taritamount to an appeal for a change of the existing order in that country. 123.. On the whole, the draft resolution should be viewed as a flagrant intervention in the internal affairs the right of self-defence and the existence of an armed directed against Soviet armed intervention in Afghanistan, the Chinese delegation will vote in favour attack against the State involved. That link does not of the draft resolution and maintains that the Soviet seem to exist in the case of Afghanistan. Even if authorities must withdraw all their invading forces 135. The delegation of the German Democratic Republic has thoroughly set forth its views on the question on the Council’s agenda. We see no reason for changing our position, but we believe it necessary, before the vote on draft resolution S/13729, to draw attention to the following points. 136. The German Democratic Republic recognizes and respects the right of all peoples to solve freely and without outside interference the questions affecting their future and the form of their Government. This applies also to the obligation of all States to refrain in their international relations from the threat or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of States. Although the draft resolution refers to those principles, the delegation of the German Democratic Republic must reject it. It does not take into account the fact that the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan and the Soviet Union acted precisely in the spirit of those principles in carrying out their joint measures to defend the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. 137. Since the draft resolution deals with internal developments in Afghanistan-which itself is inadmissible-there is a danger that such a resolution might be used as an instrument for further direct intervention by imperialist circles in the affairs of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. The fact that operative paragraph 6 provides that the Security Council should remain seized of the question, in other words, that it should in the future deal with Afghanistan’s affairs, only confirms the.apprehension that I have expressed. 138. The draft resolution fails to take into account the Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighbourliness and Co-operation between the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan and the Soviet Union, dated 5 December 1978.’ The indiscriminate implementation of the demands in operative paragraph 4 of the draft resolution would lead to a situation in which the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan would be disarmed in the face of the forces of imperialist and hegemonistic circles. This is, of course, unacceptable to the Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, and we have heard that from the mouth of the Foreign Minister of that country himself. 139. The delegation of the German Democratic Republic, in accordance with the wishes of the Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, rejects this draft resolution. In J%Iv/~~: Bangladesh, China, France, Jamaica, Mexico, Niger, Norway, Philippines, Portugal, Tunisia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Zambia Againsr: German Democratic Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

It has been suggested that the meeting should be suspended. Is there any objection? The meeting is suspended. It will be reconvened after consultations.

I wish to acknowledge the presence at the Council table of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of Mexico, Mr. Jorge Castaiieda, to whom I extend a warm welcome. 143. Members have before them document S/13731, which contains the text of a draft resolution sponsored by Mexico and the Philippines,

I should like to take this opportunity to congratulate Mexico on its election to the Security Council, which completes the Council membership by bringing it to 15, and to extend to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of Mexico, Mr. Jorge Castafieda, and his delegation our full co-operation. 145. We have heard the statements of the delegations of many countries on the situation in Afghanistan, in response to the letter to the President of the Security Council of 3 January 1980 and its addenda, which my country signed along with more than 50 other concerned nations. 146. Subsequent to the sending of that letter, and in furtherance of the concern expressed in the discussions on this matter in the Council, a draft resolution was submitted [S//3729], sponsored by Bangladesh, Jamaica, the Niger, the Philippines, Tunisia and Zambia, which we believed expressed the will and desire not only of the non-aligned group of nations 148. In our earlier statement on this auestion [2185’rh ntcetit7~], we stated our preference ‘for the discussion of what is admittedly a complex issue and for a thorough airing of all the pertinent facts, in view of the gravity of the issue. That discussion has taken place. A vote has been taken-13 votes in favour to 2 against-but the draft resolution was not adopted for lack of unanimity among the permanent members of the Council. In view of this lack of unanimity, it is my delegation’s view that the Council is unable to discharge its primary responsibility under the Charter forthe maintenance of international peaceand security. 149. The blame must be shared by the whole Council, for we are a collective body operating under rules set forth in the Charter. In the view of my delegation, the vote in the Council on the draft resolution reflects the majority sentiment of the international community, and we therefore feel that that sentiment has been frustrated by the application of the unanimity rule. 150. Because of the gravity of the issue, which is fraught with potential danger for the peoples of the world, we feel that the rest of the international community should be accorded an opportunity to affirm its concern in a larger forum, unencumbered by regulatory constraints. 151. In seeking to refer the matter to the full assemblage of nations, my delegation is acting in the spirit of the peaceful mission of the Council and is in no way desirous of widening the means of resolution of the problem beyond the peaceful means provided under the Charter of the United Nations. 152. In my delegation’s view there are three crucial elements essentially at stake in the present instance: first, the inalienable right of a people to determine its own form of government and its social, economic and political system free from any external imposition by any form of coercion, including armed intervention; secondly, respect for the sacrosanct principles of international law as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and in the decisions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, with special reference to the principles of non-interference in the internal affairs of any country, respect for the sovereignty and political independence, sovereign equality and territorial integrity of nations and the principle of the non-use of force in the settlement of 153. We should not lose hope for a peaceful settlement. We believe that we should exhaust all peaceful means available to us within the United Nations system. In order to avert the possibility that the present situation might get out of hand and escalate into a dreaded armed confrontation among the major Powers, we must immediately activate the only peaceful recourse still open to us, by referring the matter to the General Assembly. 154. It is in the light of these considerations that my delegation has decided to submit to the Security Council the draft resolution contained in document S/13731 dated 9 January 1980, sponsored by Mexico and the Philippines, which is now before the Council. The draft resolution is simple, direct and to the point. The Council would decide to refer the question of the situation in Afghanistan to the General Assembly for consideration, owing to the lack of unanimity in the Council on the question. 155. It is the hope of my delegation and of our cosponsor that this simple and direct draft resolution will immediately be approved and adopted by the Security Council, for we have no time to lose. 156. It is with deep regret that my delegation has decided to take this initiative. Only recently we had forged close and friendly relations with the Soviet Union and we have every intention of maintaining and,promoting those relations. As we all know, close relations amongst nations must be founded on mutual trust and confidence. It is precisely to strengthen those foundations and thus further to develop the relations between us-and with no desire to alienate Afghanistan, with which we have a traditional friendship and close ties-that we felt it necessary to bring the consensus of the Council to the larger forum of the General Assembly. In so doing, we want to make it perfectly clear that it is not our desire to criticize a fellow State Member of the United Nations but to dispel the atmosphere of fear and violence that now agitates mankind and to restore a climate of peace and goodwill among all of us. 157. Mr. CASTAREDA (Mexico) (intr/*pretalioir Jw77 Sptrnish): First of all, I should like to thank you, Mr. President, for your most amiable words of welcome to me. It is an honour for Mexico to take part in the work of the Council, and I feel it an honour to represent my country in the Security Council on this occasion. 158. Mexico is returning to membership in the Security Council after an absence almost as long as the life of the Organization itself. We are aware that 159. It is our intention to act, as far as possible, in a constructive and positive way; in other words, by advocating, proposing or supporting ideas and solutions compatible with the principles that we hold and that will tend to reconcile conflicting positions and lead to the resolution of tension. 160. Mexico has sponsored jointly with the delegation of the Philippines the draft resolution contained in document S/13731. By that draft resolution, the Security Council would decide to convene an emergency special session of the General Assembly to examine the question of Afghanistan. The representative of the Philippines has already explained the substance and purport of the draft resolution and therefore I need not dwell on the text. I simply wanted to say that Mexico voted in favour of the draft resolution that was not adopted due to the lack of unanimity among the permanent members of the Security Council, but we did not have an opportunity to explain our vote. We shall do so in the General Assembly, if this second draft resolution is adopted, and if the General Assembly deals with the subject in question. For the time being, I should like to say that to our mind there is no doubt at all that we are faced with an invasion-an armed intervention-and that it is the duty of the Security Council to call for the withdrawal of foreign troops now in Afghanistan. We therefore support the present draft resolution, for it seems to us logical, as a consequence of our vote in favour of the earlier draft resolution, that, since effective action was not possible in the Council because of the lack of unanimity among its permanent members, we should now ask the Assembly to take up this matter. 161. Having said that, I should like to add in closing that I would not be entirely frank if I did not say how deeply we are concerned at the evolution of the subject we are considering today, as also of the other matter of the hostages being held in Tehran. 162. We have slipped back or are in danger of slipping back into the cold war. The conflict between the great Powers has re-emerged to such an extent that we are faced with a continual escalation of measures and countermeasures of pressure and reprisals. A medium-sized developing country cannot view what is happening without real apprehension. Those who lose most in the cold war are the third-world countries. 163. Suddenly, decolonization, the negotiation of certain agreements on disarmament such as the SALT II Treaty,S regional and partial denuclearization, the acceptance of certain basic principles of a new international economic order, the negotiation of certain globally accepted rules for the law of the sea, and so forth-now all seem jeopardized. Furthermore, the possibility that a treaty like SALT II,,which benefits not only the two signatories but the entire international community, will not be ratified is of concern to and should alarm the entire world. 164. The great Powers have a new and very serious responsibility. In spite of the specific problems which now separate them, they must deal with those problems in such a way as not to exacerbate their conflicts and by reacting with moderation and prudence. We, as small countries, call upon them’ to fulfil their responsibility to make further progress on the road towards disarmament. We can’not accept that there should be any delay in economic co-operation in favour of the weaker countries simply because of this new international tyranny. 165. To sum up, we feel that, today more than ever, the great Powers have the duty to carry out their primary responsibility \,is-ri-vis the United Nations.

The delegation of the Soviet Union objects categorically to the proposal for the convening of an emergency session of the General Assembly to discuss the socalled question of the situation in Afghanistan.’ As members will recall, the Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan issued a vigorous protest against any consideration in the United Nations of this petty American-Chinese complaint and called for an end to be put to this inadmissible intervention in the internal affairs of Afghanistan. This scheme, which is hostile to the people of Afghanistan, failed in the Security Council. However, its initiators have not given up and they now want to drag this non-existent question before the General Assembly. By so doing, they are attempting to embroil the Assembly in the execution of their imperialistic and hegemonistic plans regarding Afghanistan and to impose on that international body a confrontation in the spirit of the cold war. 167. What we are witnessing here, in essence, are attempts by the United States and China to exploit 168. Attempts to embroil the United Nations even further in the discussion of the so-called question of the situation in Afghanistan are contrary to the clearly expressed will of the people and Government of Afghanistan and constitute a violation of the sovereignty of that country, These attempts are contrary to the aims and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, in particular the provisions of Article 2, paragraph 7. It is clear that, if a discussion such as the one proposed is foisted upon the General Assembly, it will not promote the strengthening of the authority and prestige of the United Nations. 169. On the basis of what I have said, the delegation of the Soviet Union will vote against the proposal contained in document S/1373 1.

I take it that the Council is now ready to vote on the draft resolution presented by Mexico and the Philippines [S/13731]. 171. I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes before the vote.

My delegation at the outset would like to extend its congratulations to Mexico on its election to membership in the Security Council. We warmly welcome the presence of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of Mexico and the members of his delegation. We look forward to working in the closest concert and co-operation. 173. Bangladesh’s position on the substantive aspects of the situation in Afghanistan has been explained at length in the Council on more than one occasion [2185th aud 2189th meetings]. We were a sponsor of the six-Power draft resolution [S/13729] which was defeated because of the negative vote of a permanent member. We believe that, in the face of this situation and the consequent inability of the Security Council to exercise its primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, a residuary responsibility does accrue to the General Assembly to take up this question on an emergency basis. Accordingly, my delegation intends to vote in favour of the draft resolution sponsored by Mexico and the Philippines, which is now before the Council [S/13731].

The delegation of the German Democratic Republic has already had an opportunity to congratulate Mexico upon its election as a non-permanent member of the Security Council. Today, the delegation of the German Democratic 175. The delegation of the German Democratic Republic considers any discussion in the United Nations of the so-called situation in Afghanistan as intervention in the internal affairs of a Member State. For the same reasons for which my delegation opposed the inclusion of this item in the agenda of the Security Council, we oppose its discussion in the General Assembly. 176. We recall that the Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan categorically protested against the intervention in its internal affairs. Without the consent of the Government of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, no one has the right to discuss the situation in that country in organs of the United Nations, since the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan poses no danger to any other State. The demand for discussion of the situation in the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan is one further attempt in certain circles to continue the campaign of slander against the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan and against the Soviet Union. 177. The delegation of the German Democratic Republic would like to express the hope that members of the Council will duly take into account the danger of intensifying a confrontation that does nothing to promote the cause of peace.

I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution submitted by Mexico and the Philippines in document s/13731. In fawur: Bangladesh, China, France, Jamaica, Mexico, Niger, Norway, Philippines, Portugal, Tunisia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America Agninst: German Democratic Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Abstaining: Zambia ,179. The PRESIDENT (i17tcl’pi’etrrtioll,~orll French): I call on the representative of Jamaica.

As the representative of the other Latin American country on the Security Council, I would not wish to let this opportunity pass without expressing, on behalf of my delegation, our very warm welcome to the delegation of Mexico. My delegation is aware of the circumstances sur- 181. Jamaica enjoys the very closest and most friendly relations with Mexico. We are aware of the great contribution that Mexico has made to the international community and to the Caribbean and Latin American regions-in very many directions. My delegation feels that Mexico’s presence on the Council will strengthen this body and will help to maintain its prestige and authority, especially in these very troubled times. 182. We, are particularly happy to have with us the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of Mexico, Mr. Castaiieda, whose deep interest in international affairs and whose considerable wisdom and influence have already been evident, once again, in the past two days. 183. The fact that Mexico will be represented on the Council by Mr. Muiioz Ledo is in itself a matter for considerable gratification. He is a diplomat of great distinction and a man of wide interests and of many accomplishments. I extend on behalf of my delegation and on my own behalf a warm welcome to him and to the other members of the delegation of Mexico.

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as representative of FRANCE. 185. France voted in favour of the motion that a special emergency session of the General Assembly 186. France feels, in fact, that the serious nature of the situation justifies a debate in the General Assembly, within the framework of the powers conferred on it in the Charter. Pursuant to Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Charter, the Security Council can request the General Assembly to make a recommendation on any dispute or situation, in observance of its powers as set forth in the text of the Charter. 187. Consequently, my delegation, while it voted in favour of the motion just adopted, naturally expresses the relevant reservations concerning the wording of the second paragraph of the preamble to this motion. 188. I now resume my capacity as PRESIDENT. There are no further speakers. The Security Council has thus concluded this ‘stage of its consideration of the item on the agenda. The tncetit~g rose tit 8.05 p.m. NOTES I To be printed in “United Nations, Treaty Series”, under No. 17976. HOW TO OBTAIN UNXCED NATIONS PUBLICATIOSS United Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstorc or writi to: United Nations, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. r) COMMENT SE PROCURER LBS PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Lee publications des Nations Units nont en vente drns les librairies et les agences ddpoaitairea du mondo cntier. Informez-vour oupre?l de votrc librnire ou adressez-vow B : Nationa Unies, Section dea venres, New York ou Gcnbve. EAR IIO~YWfTb Xi3&4HRJI OPrAHH 3AIfIIII OG%EAHHEHHMX RAUHH H3qaIWf OprawrJauHH 06zenmWwm.rx HauM ~o~ro rcyna-rb a KHXXXLIX Marasnnax H arenTcraax BO ace% paBoHax ~npn. Hneonure cnpasxa 06 nDn&nHRx of samcu KHXiWQM marasxde mnn nmumTe no anpecy: Opraxn3auun 06zeflnnexmbxx Haqsdk. C~KLWI no npoeaxe wxawil, HLK)-Ro~K I:~H Werwsa. COMO CONSECUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de Ins Nacionas Unidns e&An en vent+ an libndas y caaas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirijase a: Nacionea Unidas, Secci6n de Ventas. Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York 00400 83-61462-December 1985-2,425