S/PV.2433 Security Council

Members of the Council have before them document S/15762, containing the text of a letter dated 13 May 1983 from the representative of Panama addressed to the Secretary-General, Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted. Letter dated 5 May 1983 from the representative of Nicaragua on the Security Council addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/15746) 4. The first speaker is the Minister for External Relations of Nicaragua, on whom I now call. 5. Mr, D’ESCOTO BROCKMANN (Nicaragua) (interpretation from Spanish): A week ago today [2431st meeting] we gave an account of the death and destruction caused by the armed invasion of Nicaragua from Honduran territory, which is directed and financed by the Government of the United States. I. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): In accordance with decisions taken at previous meetings devoted to this item [2431st and 2432ndmeetings1, I invite the representative of Honduras to take a place at the Council table. I invite the representatives of Algeria, Cuba, Ethiopia, Grenada, Guatemala, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Mali, Mexico, Seychelles and the Syrian Arab Republic to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. 6. We explained that the problem was basically with the United States, which uses Somozisl Guards and Honduras as instruments of its aggressive policy. We pointed out that the complicity of the Honduran rCgime, which allows its territory to be used for attacks on Nicaragua and which increasingly involves its army in the direction and carrying out of military action against our country, was making more real the possibility that war-which we have always wished and continue to wish to avoid-may inevitably result. This would be the consequence of Honduran complicity with those who attack us. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Ortez Colitidres (Honduras) took a place’ at the Council table. Mr. Sahnoun (Algeria), Mr. Roa ~ouri (Cuba), Mr. lbruhim (Ethjopia), Mr, Taylor (Grenada), Mr. Quifiones-AmeigUita (Guatemala), Mr. Rajaje-Khorassani (Islamic Republic of Iran), Mr. neikj (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Mr. Traod (Mali), Mr. Ah+ioz Redo (Mexico), Ms. Gonthier (SeYchelles) and Mr. El-Fattal (Syrian Arab Republic) took the places reservedfor them at the side of the Council chamber. 7. Since my statement to the Council last Monday there have been a veries of new acts of aggression against my country, which I consider important to bring before the Council.

1 should like to inform members of the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Argentina, Costa Rica, El Salvador, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Mauritius, Panama, Sao Tome and PrinciPe, ,3 At 11.30 a.m. last Monday, 9 May, in El Siucet 12 kilometres east of Jalapa, and 900 metres from the 9. On Thursday, 12 May, there were six acts of aggression. At 8 a.m. there was artillery fire from Honduran territory lasting 10 minutes against the El Paraiso observation post, 12 kilometres south-west of San Pedro de Potrero Grande. At 10.28 a.m. there was similar firing from Honduran territory against the El Cortizal observation post in the same area. At 10.30 a.m. there was 81 mm mortar fire from Honduras against Las Marias observation post, 2.5 kilometres south-west of San Pedro de Potrero Grande. At noon on the same day-12 Mayin Dipilto Viejo, in the department of Nueva Segovia, a farmer, Felipe Ayestas, was kidnapped by 20 counterrevolutionaries and taken to Honduras. At 4. p.m. and again at 4.30 that day there was artillery fire for 10 minutes from Honduran territory directed against the La Ceiba observation post, 5 kilometres west of Somotillo, in the department of Chinandega, and 200 metres from the border. 10. On 13 May two Somozist “Task Forces”, made up of 500 counter-revolutionaries from Honduras, invaded our national territory, clashing with troops of the Sandinist People’s Army in a place known as Llano Bawisa in northern Zelaya, where their advance towards the interior of our territory was checked. Also on 13 May, at 9.00 a.m., 80 counter-revolutionaries from Honduras attacked the frontier post of Waspfin, using artillery and heavy machine-guns, and Nicaraguan citizen HCctor Rodriguez was killed. 11. On 14 May, at 7.00 a.m., the frontier post of Bilwaskarma was attacked from Honduran territory with mortar and machine-gun fire and Nicaraguan citizen Carlos Cajina was killed. 12. Obviously, if Nicaragua cannot by its own means persuade the Government of the sister Republic of Honduras of the importance of open and constructive dialogue in order to put an end to this serious situation; if Honduras persists in turning a deaf ear to and disregarding the initiatives of Latin American Governments that have proposed a dialogue -as have also the countries of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries; and if the Security Council itself is unable to exercise its proper authority by demanding such dialogue, Nicaragua cannot be asked to give up indefinitely its right of selfdefence. We say again, however, that Nicaragua wants peace, that we abhor war. That is why we have again come here to give an account of the acts of aggression against US by the Reagan Administration, with the complicity of the Government and army of Honduras, to our colleagues in the Council. 13. The Council has an unavoidable duty to shoulder its responsibility in the light of these facts, regardless of the will of one of its members which, because it is militarily and economically powerful, regards itself as exempt 14. Our people and our Government feel that they have a right to a response from the Security Council and that it should help put an end to the acts of aggression against our country and prevent war between brother peoples who desire peace. We do not seek to deny in any way that several Central American countries, like many other countries in Latin America and throughout the world, are experiencing difficulties, and we have not come here, as I said in my initial statement, to say more than that our country has been a victim of armed aggression and invasion. This, despite the fact that Mrs. Kirkpatrick, the representative of the United States, seeks to deny it, is something so clear that even children are capable of understanding it. 15. A letter from a child of 14 which we received only a couple of days ago deals with this eloquently. I shouid like to quote briefly from that letter: “I have been reading about the situation in Nicaragua and in El Salvador and I am very angry. I am angry with our country, I am a boy of 14 and I live in Salt Lake City, Utah, a city in the west of the United States. . . . “I have read how our Government is sending Central Intelligence Agency agents and money for weapons to the Government of Honduras. I cannot tell you how angry I am at all this, as indeed are millions of other Americans, . . . “I would like to be able to go to Nicaragua and fight on your side, but I cannot,, , but let me say this: although I am only 14 I can tell you that when two or three or four thousand people suffer hunger there is an anger more powerful in them than any nuclear weapon or any speech by Reagan.” The boy goes on to give his opinion that when soldiers fight for some Governments, and die, they do it for money, but when a Sandinist dies, “he does it for love”. Then he says: “Love is the most important thing in the universe. As a boy of 14, I can only say that you will win in the end. God bless you.” It is signed Andrew Hunt and he gives his address in Salt Lake City, Utah. 16. We found out, through the telephone company, the telephone number in order to see whether there was a boy of that name there, whether he was 14 and whether he minded if we quoted his letter in this context. I did this and he told me he would be most happy to have his letter quoted here. 17. This is just one of the many letters that we are constantly receiving from American people. I ventured to 18. Clearly, it is not only children that are aware of and condemn the atrocities committed against our people by the Reagan Administration. A few days ago, 65 American legislators, in a letter to Representative Edward Boland, also expressed their condemnation of the Reagan policy against Nicaragua, stating: 23. President Paz Garcia always received us with his customary warmth. He expressed concern at what was happening on the border and his readiness to meet Commander Ortega Saavedra. But something prevented him from accepting our suggestions of a date or making his own suggestions as to a date. Consequently, he always delegated to the Minister for Foreign Affairs the responsibility for agreeing on a date-an arrangement that was possible only for May 1981, the date on which the heads of State of Honduras and Nicaragua. met in Guasaule, which is a frontier post in Nicaraguan territory. “We believe that underwriting a counter-revolution in Nicaragua will not achieve its objective, because it does not have the support either of the public in the United States or in Latin America. . . . We consider United States involvement in such an enterprise to be fundamentally immoral.“* 19. Is it possible for the Security Council to refuse to reflect what is undoubtedly a world-wide demand and not to carry out its fundamental obligation to order the cessation of an invasion by a great Power of one of the smailest and most impoverished countries in the world and to ensure that other Governments do not allow their territory to be used for foreign wars and to compromise their own peace? 24, At that meeting there was agreement on a meeting in the near future between the leaders of the armies of Honduras and Nicaragua, the purpose of which would be to establish a joint patrol plan for the border in order to root out the Somozist camps in the area t.o stop armed incursions against Nicaragua carried out from Honduran territory by the Somozists. Such a patrol would further help to monitor more effectively any traffic in arms that might exist in that area. There was left open the possibility that this patrol would be carried out on land, on sea and in the air if the parties regarded it as necessary. I do not exaggerate if I tell the Council that at least once a week I was in touch with the then Foreign Minister of Honduras, Colonel CBsar Elvir Sierra, stressing the importance of this meeting of the top military leaders as agreed on by our heads of State. 20. Almost immediately after the triumph of the Sandinist people’s revolution, Nicaragua began to be the object of armed harassment by Somozist Guards, who carried out incursions into our territory from Honduran territory. It was clear to us that this was something that was being done unbeknown to the then President of Honduras, Policarpo Paz Garcia. We knew that there were certain military elements in Honduras that approved of the incursions and intended, from the end of 1979, not only that Honduras should co-operate with the Somozists but that they should prepare their own army to invade Nicaragua before the Sandinist people’s revolution could consolidate its position, International public opinion was informed of all of this because of the extensive reporting in the international media, where the aggressive and belligerent attitude of the then leader of the Honduran Public Security Force, Colonel Gustav0 Alvarez, was clearly established. 25. There were more and more frequent armed incursions from Honduran territory; there was a growing number of dead; and there was increasing pressure from the Reagan Administration on the Honduran army and this gained even greater momentum with the United States imposition of Colonel Alvarez as the leader of the Honduran armed forces, with the rank of general. 21, It was considered, none the less, that this scheme to involve the Honduran army could not be carried out because there were mature officials who would not countenance the Alvarez scheme, considering it irresponsible, adventuristic and highly dangerous for Honduras’s own interests. It was clear at that time that the main interest of the Somozists was to cause friction between Honduras and Nicaragua in the hope that Nicaragua would fall into the trap of counterattacking and thus provide the United States with the possibility of condemning Nicaragua as an aggressor, in order to be able to justify action against our revolution. 26. When President Roberto Suazo C6rdoba took over on 27 January 1982, Commander Ortega Saavedra visited Tegucigalpa and emphasized to the President that there was a pressing need to have a meeting as soon as possible between the army leaders of Honduras and Nicaragua in order to agree on the joint patrol and eliminate the tension produced by Somozist incursions from Honduran territory. The President said that he agreed on the importance of this and that he would talk to Alvarez, suggesting to him that this meeting should be held as soon as possible. The steps taken by Nicaragua to achieve this are too many to enumerate, Suffice it to say * Quoted in English by the speaker. 27. The Government of Honduras obviously either does not want to talk or has lost its freedom and independence to such an extent that it is not in a position to accept something which the interests of its own people would dictate. 28. In view of the impossibility of arriving at a dialogue between the top military leaders, in August Commander Ortega Saavedra invited President Suazo Cbrdoba to visit Nicaragua, That invitation was declined. 29. In this context, President JosC Mpez Portillo ofMexice and President Luis Herrera Campins of Venezuela sent letters in September last to Commander Ortega Saavedra, Co-ordinator of the Governing Junta of National Reconstruction, and to President Suazo Cordoba of Honduras, expressing their concern at the serious situation prevailing in Central America and pointing out that the most serious and distressing factor, in their opinion, was the serious deterioration in relations between Honduras and Nicaragua, a situation which could lead to an armed clash between those two fraternal countries. 30. The heads of State of Mexico and Venezuela stressed at that time the importance of initiating a frank and constructive dialogue as soon as possible in order to defuse the situation. Subsequently they expressed willingness to take part in joint talks with the heads of State of Nicaragua and Honduras and proposed that they be held at Caracas on 13 October last year. Nicaragua immediately accepted the proposal, but Honduras again declined. 31. At the end of December the invasion started, sponsored by the Reagan Administration, from Honduran territory against Nicaragua. The preparation for that invasion was denounced by Commander Ortega Saavedra in the Council in March 1982 [2335th meeting]. Consequently, in March of this year Nicaragua was again obliged to draw the Council’s attention to the consequences of that invasion. 32. In the context of this debate, Nicaragua is again emphasizing the need for bilateral talks with Honduras in order to bring about peace, and it sent a letter to the President of the Security Council on 4 April [S/15682] appealing to the Contadora Group to make every endeavour and to use its good offices within the framework of its initiative to bring about a dialogue between Nicaragua and Honduras and between Nicaragua and the United States. 33. Nicaragua regards direct dialogue with Honduras in the presence of the representatives of the Governments of 34. Hence, we regard as particularly important what was said by the Foreign Ministers of the Contadora Group at the conclusion of their second round of consultations. In their bulletin of 21 April [S/15727, annex], they stated that “agreement in principle was reached concerning the procedures of consultation and negotiation to be followed in the near future in such a way as to adapt them to the diverse nature of the subjects, irrespective of whether the latter are regional or bilateral in scope.” 35, In closing, we avail ourselves of this opportunity to express our thanks to the representatives of Mexico, Zimbabwe, Seychelles, Algeria, Grenada and Ethiopia for their important statements, for their concern, and for their efforts to achieve peace in Central America and put an end to aggression against Nicaragua.

The next speaker is the representative of Honduras, on whom I now call.

I should like to reaffirm the respect which the Council has always deserved, both from my Government and from me personally, which is more than enough reason for me not to dwell now on the personal insults gratuitously addressed to me by the Minister for External Relations of Nicaragua, the Reverend Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann, whose language and tone were, perhaps, in harmony with the aggressive mode of the Commanders who govern Nicaragua today and who have brought to a sorry pass not only their own country but also this supreme organ of the United Nations. As the representative of a non-permanent member of the Council, he is all the more obliged to maintain his composure and to present his arguments with the moderation called for by his dual capacity as the director of his country’s foreign policy and the ideologist of the new “People’s Church” of Nicaragua, 38. Regarding that unusual conduct, which all members of the Council witnessed, I should like merely to recall the words spoken by the then President of the Council, Sir John Thomson, at a recent meeting, on 29 March. He said, “I must confess that I have had moments of considerable discomfort during the debate on this agenda item [regarding Nicaragua and Honduras]. It would have been embarrassing for me to have ruled speakers out of order, but equally I was embarrassed not to rule We fully agree with those well-founded comments, and we agree that there should be respect for the great responsibility of the Council as a deliberative, consultative and, ultimately, decision-making body. 39. I cannot, however, disregard the detrimental allusions to the dignity of my country and my Government which are also hurled at us. The Minister of Nicaragua called into question the representativity which entitles me to speak on behalf of the people of Honduras, That inconsistent attitude deserves analysis. 45. Let us now consider the efforts that have been made on both sides and see whether there is a possibility of agreement. Certainly, the Minister is right concerning the various peace efforts we have made. What is happening is that everyone is reading his own book. There are children who read only their primers. Now I am going to read from my book. 40. The peaceful, customary and traditional method, recognized by law, for determining the majority will of a people is through the holding of free and honest elections. 41. The Government of Honduras came to power as a result of elections which, without undue modesty, may be regarded as exemplary. More than 82 per cent of the electorate went to the polls in an atmosphere of peace and security, while neighbouring countries, such as Nicaragua, have been floundering and continue to flounder in a bloody armed struggle. It is that duly elected Government that I represent; it, in turn, represents and is supported by the people of Honduras. 46. There have been ministerial meetings. It was my pIeasure to meet with the Nicaraguan Minister in January at Tegucigalpa, where there was discussion of existing problems and of ways to seek solutions. That was followed in April by bilateral meetings at Tegucigalpa. We also had meetings in May at San Jose, Costa Rica. The fourth time, we met at the inauguration of President Betancour of Colombia. I am referring to meetings between highest-levei representatives of our Governments, the Minister for External Relations of Nicaragua and the Foreign Minister of Honduras, Mr. Edgardo Paz Barnica. Again, in August, we had a meeting in the Dominican Republic, We also had meetings in September and October attended by Mr. Diego Cordovez, Assistant Secretary-General, who is fully conversant with the communique that was issued. Under the auspices of the Secretary-General, Secretariat services were made available to both missions in an attempt to establish a bilateral dialogue. We also had meetings in November under the auspices of the Organization of American States (OAS). In addition, we had meetings at Managua, attended by the Deputy Minister for External Relations, Mr, Tinoco, because the Minister was at the funeral of Comrade Brezhnev. We had meetings in March at Buenos Aires. 42. But, we may wonder, what are the credentials of the Minister for External Relations of Nicaragua? Can it be said that he represents the Nicaraguan people when, after holding power for four years, he cannot even consider holding elections in his country? Can it be said that he represents his people when that people is subjected to ruthless repression in every sphere of activity, as is demonstrated by the thousands of Nicaraguans who have taken up arms against the regime? It is demonstrated also by the 25,000 of his countrymen who have come to Honduras seeking refuge, a number which grows alarmingly each day and has begun to swell with the massive surrender of Nicaraguan militiamen, who last week voluntarily surrendered, with their arms and their families, to our border authorities in front of the international press. They numbered 17 militiamen and 133 family members, including old people, women and children. These troops are made up of humble peasants, sent to the front without training to fight for a cause which they do not understand owing to their ignorance and humble way of life. 47. There have also been meetings of chiefs of staff at Tegucigalpa, and on the last occasion, my country, Honduras, suggested that efforts be made to establish a demilitarized zone on the Atlantic and the Pacific, having 43. The international community can weigh the differences involved. Furthermore, the Council is not unaware 49. However, it is touching and interesting to read how an American boy, in the ingenuous way that children have, described his thoughts about the conflict between Honduras and Nicaragua. We are interested in what children are thinking, particularly children of other continents, such as the statement which appeared yesterday in The New York Times, to the effect that in the port of San Juan de1 Sur in Nicaragua a fishing port and a fishprocessing plant had been set up. Indeed, those fish were so big that no child could carry them. As is clear, we are talking about little children and big fish, It is elegant, human and sensitive to learn from children, as the Minister of Nicaragua said. But we also have to learn from the fables, among them that of the wolf in sheep’s clothing, and that famous story of the Trojan horse, which served to bring down the fortress that was preventing the conquest of the desired objective. 50. My Government gave its firm promise, and has kept its word, not to mobihze troops at all, and I can officially state that it will not do so except to defend its integrity and national sovereignty, as is only logical, since this is a categorical provision of our Republic’s Constitution. 51. In closing I should like it to be noted that it is unusual in this lofty forum, whose primary responsibility is the maintenance of peace throughout the world, to hear threats of war such as those made by the Minister for External Relations of a sister country, Nicaragua. 52. Of course, it is sometimes ill-advised to speak without thinking. If we correctly analyse the basis of this institution, the United Nations, we must not forget that Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter which governs us clearly provides that “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,” 53. These discussions must be weighed by the Council, particularly taking into account that Nicaragua is party to a dispute with my country. For this reason alone its readiness to participate in passing Council resolutions by its vote becomes reprehensible and partial. 54. My country wishes merely to make a contribution to the discussions, with all due customary respect, in the quest for solutions to the problems raised. For this rea- 55. The excuse is sometimes offered that the men who have fought in Nicaragua are people who came down from the mountains, but they are now leaders of government who must act responsibly, with the tact and decorum which the national dignity of a country demands. 56. We wish to be positive, and here we are going to state a few key points of the dialogue that we are seeking to achieve most anxiously. 57. First of all, Honduras declares that we are more than ready to arrive at serious, responsible agreements as a result of a regional consensus in which, in addition to our two countries-Nicaragua and Honduras, which are the parties directly involved-Costa Rica, El Salvador and Guatemala should take part. Such agreements do not preclude our dealing with bilateral problems as part of the context, but we continue to believe that Central America as a whole has to take part in building a permanent peace for the region. To give one example: the matter of the quantity of arms passing through our territory cannot be resolved only or exclusively by bilateral talks, because it affects El Salvador, a Government which is also bloodied by the massive arms traffic through Nicaraguan territory. 58. Secondly, we support the endeavours made to this end by the Contadora Group, the members of which are Colombia, Mexico, Panama and Venezuela, who have made considerable progress in seeking to organize talks among the parties involved and who, together with our five States which formerly made up the Federal Republic of Central America, should be given the opportunity of fully applying their diplomatic talents and efforts to seeking a constructive settlement, without additional factors or interference, which could be the case if the Secretnry- General of the United Nations were forced to participate urgently and without first having in his difficult task the consensus and support of the five Central American countries which are the fundamental political and legal basis on which the mandate of the Contadora Group rests. That might even endanger the progress andresults so carefully and intelligently achieved thus far by that Group, which as a peace-loving people we would have to deplore. 60. The Charter of the United Naiions contains specific chapters to the effect that States should work together, and it is logical that, when we talk about Africa, we would like to see African problems dealt with in African consultative and institutional forums, The Europeans have their own organizations for human rights and political and economic affairs. We Latin Americans, too, have our forum. Both Honduras and Nicaragua are still members of the OAS, and if for any reason one of the countries disapproves of that body, it should say so, There are specific legal channels for making the necessary complaints. 66. But, unfortunately, we have to admit that we are passing through a decade which is increasingly characterized by serious localized conflagrations in the third world that may spread-and the winners will not be the apparent belligerents but those who cynically arm them. It will be the victory of the arms dealers and those who use their creative genius to control matter for purposes detrimental to the master plan of the Gieat Architect of the Universe. 61. Finally, we regard as contradictory and precipitate the action taken by Nicaragua before the Council, bearing in mind that we had unanimously given the Contadora Group a mandate and that that mandate still stands and enjoys the support of all the parties. This will never prevent our taking a decision to maintain consistent conduct in accordance with international law and faithful to the commitments assumed under the charter of the Organization of American States and the Charter of the United Nations. 67. My country cannot remain indifferent to the conflicts that are shaking the brother States of Central America. Therefore it is our duty as a member of the Security Council to appeal to the parties, in the words of the Secretary-General, “to make a serious effort to reinforce the protective and pre-emptive ring of collective security which should be our common shelter”.’ It was precisely that shelter that was envisaged in 194.5 by the representatives of our peoples emerging exhausted from two deadly wars; they thought that future generations would never again know war. Why are we today desecrating the inheritance of our forebears?

It is a pleasure for my delegation and me to repeat our words of welcome and heartfelt congratulations to you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for this month. You have come at a time when the Council needs someone of your calibre. Your diplomatic and political reputation has placed you in the forefront of Zaire’s national life and has admirably suited you for the functions assigned to you by the President and Founder of the People’s Movement of the Revolution, Marshal Mobutu Sesse Seko Kuku Gbendu Wa Zabanga. My delegation is convinced that, given your qualities and ability-and the first consultations that you have held already augur well-you will discharge your functions competently and steadfastly and, in particular, with the enthusiasm which is characteristic of the representatives of Zaire to the United Nations, who are past masters in the art of the gavel. 68. If we consider the present situation in Nicaragua, we see that the facts are at once relevant and disturbing. That citizens discontented with their Governments should rebel and take up arms against those Governments is part of the peripheral aspects of power and must be dealt with as a domestic matter, The uprising would even be legitimate if power no longer served the common good. In this particular case, however, is it a mere internal uprising? Is it a demonstration of the popular will seeking to restore legality and democracy? That would seem not to be the case, because, in the opinion o* delegation, the situation in Nicaragua is complicate rivalries among the great Powers. Each of them be1 that the other is trying to expand its influence in the region and takes steps to oppose that expansion. That is what complicates the internal situation in Nicaragua delegation is convinced that if the people of that co1 were given the means of resolving their problems wit any foreign interference, they could overcome their ent difficulties. By overthrowing the dictatorial regime 01 Somoza, the Nicaraguan people demonstrated its 1 63. To your predecessor, Mrs. Jeane Kirkpatrick, the United States representative, we express our hearty thanks for having conducted the Council’s work last month. Thanks to her patience and tenacity, she guided our thinking on the future of the Organization. 64. I should also like to welcome among us Mr. Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, the Minister for External Relations of Nicaragua, who came specially to tell US Of his Government’s concern at the situation prevailing in his Country. 65. Have the technological developments of our world today, which give rise to the highest hopes with respect to 70. The people of Nicaragua is merely asking to be allowed to live in peace, protected from East-West rivalries, to devote itself to the enormous task of national reconstruction. 71. Another point of concern to my delegation is the frenzied introduction of all sorts of weapons into the region. The arms race is no longer the madness of the great Powers alone; the small countries too have been contaminated, and we wonder how they can reconcile that madness with development needs. 72. If lack of confidence and mutual fear have made States in the region overarm themselves, might this proliferation of weapons not awaken desires on the part of certain States that consider themselves powerful enough to impose on their neighbours their model of society? It is precisely a Macbeth-style tragedy that we are witnessing in Central America, one of the acts of which is being played today in Nicaragua. My delegation sincerely hopes that the curtain can be brought down on this last scene and that the word “disarmament”, a basic concern of the United Nations, can be introduced to the region. This means that we must assist all the neighbouring States to become aware of the ideal of the Organization and particularly of their interdependence. In that regard, a thorough analysis leads us to believe that all the political, economic and social problems of the region and therefore all the crises that engulf it are closely related and that any solution guaranteeing lasting peace must be comprehensive. 73. Therefore my delegation welcomes the initiative of the Contadora Group and endorses its conclusions of 21 April [see S/15727, annex] and 13 May [see S/15762, annex]. It calls upon the States involved in this tragic situation to support it and appeals to all the members of the OAS to refrain from any actions or statements that might envenom the situation and to do everything possible to bring peace to their neighbours, who so sorely need it, irrespective of the types of society they have freely chosen. We make this appeal in the name of the ethical principles which govern relations among human beings, of which the primary law is tolerance. Thus my delegation is not seeking, in this painful ation, to condemn or to justify anyone. Any value ement would severely test our already sorely tried nization, because what we must do is preserve this re for harmonizing the actions of nations”. conclude by calling upon every member of the il and particularly the parties to the dispute to

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

First of all, Sir, my delegation wishes to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for this month. We are convinced that your knowledge of international affairs and your diplomatic experience will assist the Council to resolve this serious crisis following the acts of aggression against Nicaragua. I should like to take this opportunity also to express our admiration for the way in which the representative of the United States, Mrs. Kirkpatrick, guided the work of the Council last month. 78. My delegation has asked to speak to express its total solidarity with Nicaragua, which is the victim of aggression directed, financed and protected by the United States, using counter-revolutionary elements. The number of these elements infiltrated from Honduras is now 7,000 combatants, armed to the teeth, according to information supplied by the press agencies. 79. The basic purpose of this meeting is to review this serious situation and consider what measures can be taken, bearing in mind what the Minister for External Relations of Nicaragua has called a new stage in the invasion of Nicaragua by Somozist forces hostile to the progressive Sandinist regime. 80. We would stress that our delegation and many delegations of non-aligned countries gave warning in March 1982 of a plot being hatched against Nicaragua. We repeated that warning following the execution of this plot two months ago. But today, we are facing an act of aggression of which Nicaragua is the victim, and all the States Members of the United Nations must shoulder their responsibility under their Charter commitment to eliminate aggression by the most effective and rapid means. 81. It is noteworthy that, since the beginning of this new crisis created by the United States in Central America to put an end to the Sandinist movement, Nicaragua has been trying to establish friendly and constructive relations with all its neighbours, while its enemies have been trying to intensify bitterness against Nicaragua by Various means, including economic blockades and military provocation on the ground, in the air and at sea and the sabotaging of the country’s vital services. 82. Nicaragua has repeatedly appealed to Honduras and to the United States to take part in talks at the highest level, and it has asked the members of the Contadora Group to follow up their initiative and ask the Secretary-General to participate in getting negotiations “we have come in search of peace before those with the highest responsibility on Earth for safeguarding international peace and security, We have not come looking for condemnation; rather, we have come in search of peace.” [See 2431st meeting, para, 44.1 The Minister also proposed that this dialogue take place at United Nations Headquarters. To date, however, these appeals have not received a positive response, although the head of the United States delegation, in her statement on 25 March, appealed for negotiations and reconciliation, advising everyone to renounce violence. She even gave us all a lesson by quoting a famous writer, as follows: “Whoever has once announced violence as his method must inexorably choose lying as his principle.” [See 2423rd meeting, para. 118.1 We wonder, today, who is practising violence; who is evading conciliation and avoiding negotiation. 86. In that same statement, President Reagan said the following concerning Nicaragua: “If they want to tell us that we can give money and do the same things as we have been doing so far-giving money, providing assistance and so forth to these people directly-and making it overt instead of covert, that’s all right with me. I just don’t want the restrictions put on it that they might put on.” 83, It is the United States that is preparing and training saboteurs and sending them to Nicaragua. This has been the sub.ject of news items in the American press. United States senators and representatives are not in agreement as to whether or not they should linance these operations of aggression. What is the nature of these actions? Are they open military operations, or are they clandestine operations that do not fall within the purview of the United States Congress’? That is the big question which ordinary Americans and American officials are asking, as if the dispute were not about the principle of the use of force but about the way to make use of it. 87. The new American doctrine opens up new dimensions. It entails the exporting of “made-in-America” democracy by force-that is, the export by force of American democracy manufactured in the laboratories of the United States as if the principle of the non-use of force laid down in the Charter did not apply to America when it was determined to export democracy via the CIA and as if it were indeed possible to export democracy by way of armed violence and sabotage. President Reagan voiced similar ideas in his speech before a joint session of Congress on 27 April when he spoke of Central America and of Nicaragua in particular. We do not have time to go into all the “democracies” the United States has exported, Foremost among them are the Israeli democracy, the democracy of South Africa and the democracy of the late Shah of Iran. I shall confine myself to mentioning those three since I am loath to enter into a debate with the imported democracies. 84, The New York Times of 5 May quoted a statement by President Reagan. This has already been quoted by others in this chamber but, according to an Arab proverb, one benelits from repetition. It is this: “President Reagan said today that insurgent groups in Nicaragua receiving covert aid from the Central Intelligence Agency were ‘freedom fighters’ opposing a Government that had betrayed its revolutionary principles. “He said it would be ‘all right with me’ if Congress wanted to require that assistance to the rebels be ‘overt instead of covert’, but added that there would have to be no further restrictions imposed on their activities. 88. Nicaragua is being subjected to aggression, and that aggression is unleashing violence designed to overthrow the Government and to change the revolutionary regime that exists in that country. There has indeed been overt armed intervention, as has been admitted officially. It is an act in violation of the most elementary principles of international law, the Charter of the United Nations and the resolutions of the General Assembly, in particular the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.* The Security Council must take steps to stop the aggression and put an end to it in a manner appropriate to the situation. “The President said the Sandinist regime in Nicaragua, which took power in a revolution in 1979, Was ‘a Government out of the barrel of a gun’, and he questioned its right to retain powers2* 85. That statement is a declared principle of the theory of President Reagan of the United States. BY theory 1 * Quoted in English by the speaker- 90. The Conference denounced-I shall not quote directly, but merely sum up what was said-in its Political Declaration the new and increasing threats and sabotage and the growing seriousness and increased numbers of acts of aggression against Nicaragua, particularly the violation of its airspace and territorial waters, use of the territory of foreign countries in and outside the region as bases for aggression and the training of counterrevolutionary forces, the commission of terrorist actions and sabotage, particularly the attacks of armed groups of the guards of Somozaof the former President-across its northern border, which resulted in considerable loss of life and property. The Conference also denounced the measures of economic pressure being taken at the international level, which are seen as part of a deliberate plan to harass and destabilize the country, as had been acknowledged by a foreign Power-that governed by President Reagan, the United States of America. 91. The participants in the Conference appealed to all States to refrain from acts of aggression, threat or use of force and intervention in the internal affairs of other States. The Conference affirmed the right of every State to choose its own political, social and economic system and to pursue its economic development free from any form of foreign intervention or pressure, It commended the peace initiatives of Mexico, France, Venezuela, Colombia and Panama. 92. We share the opinion of those who say that the crisis in Central America is to a very great extent the result of the traditional structures of the forces of repression and national economic structures that create POV- ?rtY, kKpality and destitution, all of which have been lgravated by the interference of many kinds from which >se countries have suffered since the end of the last tury. That is why we believe American interference and se of force by the United States against certain Cenme&an countries can only be interpreted as a stub- 94. Conditions in Central America will not improve as long as the United States and the organs of the CIA do not loosen their grip on those countries. We have no hope of seeing a new day dawn of stability, progress and well-being for the peoples of that region as long as they are not given the opportunity to exercise their right of self-determination in complete freedom. Given the nature of this region, we believe that it is appropriate to encourage bilateral dialogue between Nicaragua and Honduras, with the participation of the Contadora Group, We call upon the United States to recognize the interests of the peoples of that region and not to view them solely from the standpoint of its own special interests. The Secretary-General must use his good offices to resolve the problems that threaten peace in Central America within the framework of the Contadora principles.

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

Sir, allow me to express my delegation’s satisfaction at seeing you assuming the Council presidency for this month. I am confident that your wide experience in international affairs and your well-known ability will contribute to the success of our deliberations in the difficult circumstances in which Nicaragua’s complaint with regard to aggression against it is being considered. I should also like to express my gratitude to the members of the Council for allowing me to participate in the debate. 97. Only a few days ago one of the representatives who spoke before me referred to the sometimes unreal atmosphere that often permeates diplomatic arguments in international forums, where words become merely Pharisaical exercises used in Orwellian “newspeak” whereby aggression is redoubled peace, and duplicity Gospel truth. 98. It is an extraordinary experience to hear the representative of the United States say that the United States “does not invade small countries” and that “Our neighbours need have no such concerns” [see 2431st meeting, para. 1021. Since it is obvious that one wishes to trans- Port us to the land of fairy tales, I would compare that assertion with what was said by the Big Bad Wolf to Little Red Riding Hood after he had gobbled up the proverbial grandmother. I do so on the understanding that it becomes superfluous to list the acts of intervention and plunder perpetrated by this angelic Power in Latin America from the end of the last century until now, 100. It is timely to ask the members of the Council, who have such specific lofty responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations, what they think such a statement by the head of State of a permanent member of the Council deserves. Can any member here ignore its moral, legal and political implications in the light of the principles of international law and the Charter? 101. In this instance the United States Government has abandoned any pretence at morality or legality. After proclaiming to the four winds that its aggressive policy against Nicaragua was designed only to prevent alleged arms-trafficking from that country to El Salvador, it now confesses its real and true purpose: to bring down the Governing Junta of National Reconstruction and destroy the Sandinist revolution. Threats against those who do not embrace its creed have not been directed solely against third countries. In his statement to a joint session of Congress, the President of the United States did not fail to warn his opponents that they would also be guilty if they did not support his warlike designs in Central America. That is, without any doubt, a fateful warning in an electoral campaign year in this-we are tolddemocracy par excellence. 102. The arguments-or, better, the pretexts-adduced in the Council and outside it to justify the anti-Sandinist wild insanity of the United States leaders seem drawn from a textbook for political illiterates. These inveterate players of interventionist poker who invoke the picturesque “domino theory” of subversion, according to which the only nuclear Power in the hemisphere is running an imminent risk because the famished, exploited and wretched people of Central America wish to throw off the rapacious, bloody oligarchies; these plunderers of a considerable part of’ the territory of Mexico who are still occupying Puerto Rico and are responsible for interventions in many Latin American countries; the daily despoilers of the fruit of the labour of our peoples; those who extol the alleged virtues of the OAS-where, as distinct from other truly regional bodies, if all fools wore white caps, we should seem a flock-and of the 1947 Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, characteristically disregarding the British aggression against the Malvinas and attributing to a shady conspiracy of “international communism” the insurgence of the peoples of our America: they are the knights errant of’ the outdated, inoperative and putrid “Monroe Doctrine”. 103. Twenty-four years after the triumph of the Cuban revolution, thev are still clinging to a WillY-nillY vision Of 104. The intellectual and material creators of the sickening tyranny of Somoza and promoters of the death of Sandino have little or no ground for calling the Nicaragua revolution to account. By what right? How can anyone who for five decades was jointly responsible for and beneficiary of the exploitation, martyrdom and humiliation of the Nicaraguan people seek to teach patriotism to those who yesterday risked their lives-and today continue to do so-for the freedom, happiness and wellbeing of their beleaguered country? Who said that that oligarchic system of government is the measure of all things and the imposed panacea fbr the woes of our people? 105. It is no secret to anyone that the Honduran military high command is implicated to the hilt in United States aggression against Nicaragua. They even state-or so we are told-that they are ready to take direct part in the venture, because they can rely on United States naval cover and have air superiority over Nicaragua. It is also obvious that the Honduran Government can do nothing against the decision of the allied generals of the Pentagon. The military leaders who might have opposed the insane idea have been dispatched abroad or are now no longer in their posts. Neighbouring Governmentswhich should be concerned at the unforeseeable consequences of the internationalization of the conflict-reactionary, as they are, fundamentally feel pleased that a few compliant strutting militiamen should pull the chestnuts out of the fire for them, drowning in blood the people’s revolution in Central America. 106. They should be warned. Those who suppose it to be an easy victory against the Nicaraguan revolution are wrong. Those who, because they feel protected by Yankee power, think it feasible to stem the tide of history and ruin Nicaragua are wrong. Sandino’s people did not fight in vain for the conquests of the revolution or for a free country, No people in America, I assure you, will stand by impassively in the face of imperialist aggression against that sister nation. 107. The Minister for External Relations of the Republic of Nicaragua, Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann, was categorical in his condemnation of the aggression being waged today against his country, and of its perpetrators, but he was also categorical in expressing Nicaragua’s wish for peace and its readiness to seek peaceful solutions, in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Charter. 109. The draft resolution that is being drawn up by the non-aligned members of the Council also confirms the Nicaraguan Government’s peace-loving character and its adherence to principles. Setting aside the condemnable offences-indeed, the aggressive actions of a permanent member of the Council and of a neighbouring countrythe draft resolution is limited to requesting the continuation of the efforts undertaken by Colombia, Mexico, Panama and Venezuela, the member countries of the Contadora Group, to find peaceful solutions to the problems which affect the region and to asking the Secretary- General, in accordance with Charter provisions, to assist such efforts and, if necessary, to make available his good offices to help achieve the peaceful objectives we all desire. Nothing less would suffice, indeed, in these grave circumstances. 110. Cuba has already stated in previous meetings of this supreme body its unequivocal support for any effort to achieve a negotiated settlement of the problems affecting Central America today, particularly the aggression aimed at Nicaragua. We are aware of the real economic and social roots of those problems, which have nothing to do with a confrontation between East and West, and of the exogenous sources that tend to exacerbate them, transforming them into a threat to regional and international peace and security. For these reasons we consider it essential for the Security Council, as the main body responsible for maintaining that peace and security, to take action. I1 1. Perhaps it is not too much to recall to members the serious responsibility which falls to the Council at this time of decisions, when we repeat our confidence that your adherence to the principles of the Grganization and your sense of duty will guide you once again down the path of the defence of peace and justice.

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

I should like, first of all, to make an unusual and candid remark, Since my arrival here a few months ago my personal feelings about the complex machinery of the United Nations and about 114. In such circumstances one gropes for certainties, assurances, and one stumbles upon a passage like this one from an article entitled “Global Paternalism: the U.N. and the New International Regulatory Order”: “Politics at the United Nations takes a rather pure form, worthy of our state legislatures at the turn of the century. There is a good deal of vote trading, armtwisting, demagoguery, playing to the galleries, a certain amount of buying and selling, log-rolling and pork-barrelling.. . , There is widespread cynicism and tacit understanding that a good many of the declarations of intentions that are made will never be implemented.” Such an analysis is therapeutic. It shocks us out of Utopian complacency and points to more realistic directions in our conduct of international affairs. That reminds me of club-footed Talleyrand, who, on his return to Paris from Vienna, was asked by a lady: “And what did your Excellency do during the Convention?” “Madam, I limped”, he answered and was rightly understood as referring not merely to his physical mishap. 115. The questions we shall try to answer at this Council meeting on Nicaragua will be: Are welimping along too? Why? And what can we do to improve progress? 116. When I addressed the Council on the same issue on 24 March [2422nd meeting], I said that there seemed to be, in principle, widespread agreement among the States involved about the necessity of defusing the situation-and the sooner the better, Aware of the fact that the problem has wider international dimensions, my delegation called for the good offices of the Secretary- General to help in the process of negotiations that would include bilateral and multilateral actions likely to bring together both the countries directly concerned and the Latin American States on the periphery, A draft resolution likely to be presented here has been distributed. Its penultimate paragraph requests the Secretary-General to assist the Contadora Group of countries and to use, if necessary, his good offices in the achievement of its peaceful objectives. We recommend this to the consideration of the Council. 117. There is indeed little indication that the measure of agreement that existed last March has been impaired by subsequent developments. It is gratifying to note that at the regional level the greatest aspiration of the Central American States is to unite around the concept of a great 118. The statements that were made here on 9 May [24.31st meeting] reinforce the feeling we had in March that a basis for agreement already exists, 123. My country this month presides over the meetings of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) at the United Nations, and my Government firmly believes in non-alignment. Though I would be repeating what many others have already said, I should like to reaffirm the position which the organizations we belong to have adopted on many occasions, the latest being in New Delhi last March, namely, that they are concerned at the development of the present crisis in Central America, which threatens the peace and security of the world. They have urged all States to adhere scrupulously to the principles of the non-use of force or the threat of force, non-intervention and non-interference in the internal affairs of other States, and respect for the politica independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the States of the region and for their right to be free from any interference or external pressure of any kind. How are we going to achieve that? 119. The Minister for External Relations of Nicaragua stressed the importance of restoring peace in Central America and mentioned the efforts made by the Contadora countries to find a solution. These efforts represent, he said, the most important Latin American peace initiative in the area. He went on to quote the Secretary- General’s report on the work of the Organizatiox? to the thirty-seventh session of the General Assembly about the role the Security Council could play in world affairs if better means could be found to implement its resolutions. The Nicaraguan Minister then added that, under the auspices of the Council and of the Secretary-General, his Government would co-operate with the initiatives of the Contadora Group for constructive dialogue with Honduras and the United States. 120. The representative of Honduras in the concluding remarks of his statement said that his Government was not against dialogue. He stressed, however, that as the issue interested the whole region, all the countries concerned should join in. He emphasized the need for regional consultations and negotiations, adding that that did not exclude dialogue. 124. Like the President of the Security Council in March, we believe that at the meetings of the Council strong language has been used in the past. Vindication of that has rested on the reasoning that some here have cried in silence for so long in the wilderness that they now open wide the sluice-gates of pent-up frustrations. That argument deserves sympathy and understanding. None the less, my delegation thinks that, however desperate conditions may have been, self-control always commands respect, Extreme posturing is not helpful, nor is it conducive to the creation of a climate of trust and understanding, especially here in the sanctum wzctorum of the United Nations, where the Council’s primary responsibility and objective are, according to the Charter, the maintenance of international peace and security. The Council is a deliberative, consultative and decision-making body. We sllould by all means enhance its prestige and improve its efficiency by observing due restraint in our interventions. 121. The United States representative stated that her country would not invade smaller States situated along the frontiers of her country which had no forces of occupation stationed anywhere in the world. The neighbours of the United States need have no fear, she guaranteed. French writer and journalist Jean-Francois Revel in an analysis of Mrs, Kirkpatrick’s speeches on foreign policy has concluded that “she understands that truth is the main weapon of democracy”. We accept her statement as true. Given those assurances and considering that in these circumstances whatever gap remains can only be narrow if we are all saying what we really mean, one would venture the hope that, like Talleyrand, we are limping along towards a settlement. 125. Secondly, we wish to make some ProPoSitions which would be likely to help US move closer to Our 122. There is, however, an ingrained belief in popular thought and in the media that diplomacy is synonYmous with duplicity. That was grafted in our COnscioUSneSS objective. The basis of these propositions is the Charter of the United Nations and those of the other interna- 126. Finally, we suggest that the Security Council adopt measures that would contribute to a cessation of hostilities and pave the way for meaningful negotiations both regionally and bilaterally. Among such measures, the Council could consider sending, with the consent of the parties concerned and when appropriate, a commission to supervise the normalization of the border region where there have been confrontations or territorial violations. Some representatives, notably the representative of Peru [2426fh meeting], mentioned similar propositions last March. We here subscribe to the views they expressed. 127. I do not know how much of all this can be achieved within a short time, before the situation completely escapes our control. There is ground for moderate optimism. Transposing to the sphere of international relations the chiaroscuro elements we sometimes find in Flemish painting, which correspond to my feelings as outlined at the very beginning of this statement, the Council might yet hope to achieve a Rembrandt-like quality in the work it is doing here on the Central American canvas. 128. Before I resume my place at the side of the Council chamber, I should like to conclude with what it is customary to begin with at United Nations gatherings. 129. I wish first to pay a tribute, Mr. President, to your predecessor in the Chair, Mrs. Jeane Kirkpatrick of the United States, for the way in which she conducted the Council’s affairs during the month of April. Marcus Aurelius, in ancient Rome, insistently advised that “we must be clear-headed and realistic”. To that advice, Mrs. Kirkpatrick has added clarity of expression and spirited repartee. [The speaker continued in French.] 13 1. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Guatemala. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

The Republic of Guatemala, through the delegation which I represent, congratulates you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council. We hope that your knowledge and vast experience, together with your spirit of impartiality, will help you guide the Council’s debate to a successful outcome. We wish also to express our gratitude to Council members for having allowed us to participate in this debate. 133. Barely six weeks ago we were apprised of Nicaragua’s request, when that country complained that subversive forces had entered its territory. At that time [2427fh meeting] Guatemala expressed its concern that there might be further bloodshed among Central American brothers. At that same time my country expressed its desire to take part in a meeting of Central American Foreign Ministers, so tha.t we Central Americans could be the first to seek a solution to our own problems. In the course of that debate we listened to lofty ideas fervidly expressed: several countries, particularly those of Latin America, advocated dialogue and the quest for solutions. We also heard Colombia, Mexico, Panama and Venezuela, members of the so-called Contadora Groupcountries whose wishes do indeed carry weight with Central Americans-call for dialogue, for political negotiation, for the search for solutions with a view to furthering economic and social development. We also heard the delegation of Cuba, which said, “For these reasons, my delegation hails the peace initiative launched on the Panamanian island of Contadora by the Governments of Colombia, Mexico, Panama and Venezuela, which has been accepted by Nicaragua, as a genuine effort . . . at finding a just and lasting solution of these conflicts,” [See 242lst meeting, paru. 49.1 Other countries of Latin America and North America expressed themselves in the same, or similar, terms. All these statements awakened great and comforting hopes when it was eventually concluded that there would be more than just the fiery language of rhetoric and that the search for solutions would be the driving force behind the dialogue. 134. It was in that spirit that Central American countries welcomed the kind visit of the Foreign Ministers of 135. The Central American Foreign Ministers understood that outside interests must not seek to divide peoples united by tradition, religion, the Spanish language and similar ideals. Ceritral Americans do not want desolation and death; we wish to delete from our dictionary the abominable word “war’‘-especially if it be war among brothers. 136. Among Governments with differences, silence is not the best counsellor. At the Panama meeting there was agreement on a further round of talks to be held in May in order to lay down the basis for an open dialogue, honourable in purpose, with the aim of preventing Central American society from foundering in chaos and disillusionment, and avoiding a situation where the tears of our peoples would move the consciences of those who reject dialogue. 137. We know that the problems are difficult and their solutions complex but, for my country’s part, there is more than enough determination to face up to them and to help to resolve them. Guatemala believes that peoples live only when they have a spirit of struggle and sacrifice, and that spirit exists only when there is freedom and understanding. This is not a time to laugh or to cry; it is a time to seek how to remedy the difficulties. 138. We believe that, since the spirit and desire to seek Central American solutions to Central American problems have been affirmed, and since certain principles and bases have been laid down, the efforts of the countries in the area should be pursued in the quest for solutions, with the collaboration of the Contadora Group, whose members are Latin American countries, all of them adjacent to the Central American area. To seek the intervention of other countries or organizations at this stage can only be counter-productive. We think that first of all it must be Central Americans who make the effort to find solutions. They must be the ones to restore order and set the objectives, but in a spirit of frank dialogue, for otherwise multilateral talks could seem to be lighting the way to a solution but would fail for a lack of truth. 139. With reference to the request from Nicaragua which gave rise to this new debate, Guatemala reiterates 140. Last Friday [2432&meeting] the representative of Mexico indicated agreement with a draft resolution prepared by developing countries non-permanent members of the Council in which the countries involved in the Contadora endeavour are given additional support in continuing their task. Furthermore, the draft resolution requests the Secretary-General to use his good offices, in co-ordination with the Contadora Group, in the search for a solution to the problems affecting peace in Central America. 141. My country knows that the Contadora Group has convened the five Central American countries to a further meeting at the end of May this year. No other body or person has been asked to take part in that meeting, because that would be like acknowledging in advance the failure of that move without even trying it. Our country recognizes, appreciates and commends the high moral and intellectual qualities of the Secretary- General, but, in the first instance, would like the Central Americans, with the Contadora Group as witnesses, to be the ones to discuss and seek a solution to their problems, without the intervention of other bodies or persons. We reiterate our faith in multilateral talks among Central Americans and the Contadora countries on the basis of a general approach to Central American problems and our deep-rooted belief in the spirit of Central Americanism, which will manage to find peace with justice.

I shall now call on representatives who wish to speak in exercise of the right of reply. 143. Mr, D’ESCOTO BROCKMANN (Nicaragua) (Interpretation from Spanish): I simply wish to express surprise at the fact that the representative of Guatemala has informed the Council that just over two weeks ago a meeting was held in Panama-according to him-of Foreign Ministers of Central America and Foreign Ministers of the Contadora Group. First of all, at no time was there any meeting of all the Foreign Ministers of Central America with the Contadora Group countries. Tn Panama, the second round of consultations was held by the four Contadora Foreign Ministers separately with each of the Foreign Ministers of the Central American coun- 144. I venture to quote from the information bulletin published by the Contadora Foreign Ministers at the end of this second round of consultations in Panama some two and a half weeks ago [s/15727, annex]: “It was agreed that rigid and inflexible approaches which might obstruct the common purpose of bringing about dttente and promoting peaceful coexistence must be avoided. To that end, agreement in principle was reached”. 145. In other words, the Contadora Foreign Ministers, after holding separate consultations with each of them, agreed on the procedures of consultation and negotiation that would have to be followed in the near future, in such a way as to accommodate the diverse nature of the topics, be they regional or bilateral in character. So, for topics of a regional character, as was said at that timeeverything relating to the Central American common market, and so on-they suggest that in the future we should aclopt a regional approach; but for topics clearly bilateral in nature the procedure should henceforward be bilateral. 146. This was the burden of the consultations of the Contadora Foreign Ministers with the Foreign Minister of Honduras as to his readiness to enter into bilateral talks with Nicaragua in the presence of the Contadora Foreign Ministers. 147. Foreign Minister Edgardo Paz Barnica agreed to enter into talks with Nicaragua in the presence of the Contadora Ministers. He agreed, further, that his willingness to do so should be made public at a dinner held in the Holiday Inn in Panama, at which the guests were the Contadora Ministers and which was attended by all the Central American Ministers. The only time we were all together was at that dinner. 148. Acting as spokesman of the Contadora Group, the Foreign Minister of Mexico announced that, after the consultations between the Group and each of the Central American Foreign Ministers, there would be a Honduran- Nicaraguan meeting in their presence and that Honduras had already agreed to that. Unfortunately, at the time that the dialogue was to take place Honduras again declined-despite the fact that it had previously agreed, as confirmed by the Foreign Ministers of the Contadora Group and made public by them. ‘49. I must stress something which is obvious. The reptentative of Guatemala said that we must have Central lerican solutions for Central American problems. I k he means that, for Central American problems, the ltries of Central America should get together. The -d States invasion of my country is fundamentally a 150. We have indeed always been ready to meet the Governments of the other Central American countries in order to deal with matters that are highly Central American in nature. That is why I am surprised at this hypocritical attitude-I am sorry, but I can find no other word for it-on the part of the United States Government, which now presents itself before international public opinion as the “champion” of Central American cooperation and co-ordination. What is the truth? 151. I shall not relate the entire history of the United States position and policy over the years, which hampered even the achievement of the dreams of our countries once the Central American Federation broke up although we managed again to reunite. I shall simply refer to something that happened in recent years and of which some representatives will have memories of their own, I am sure. 152. From 15 to 17 March 1980, something was achieved in Central America which was very important for Central American co-ordination and co-operation. After eight years during which no meeting was held among the Foreign Ministers of those States, one was held at San Jo&, Costa Rica, at which an institutional framework was given to the Association of Central American Foreign Ministers, as a result of the now famous San Jose Declaration. I. 153. I shall be brief about this as I may have to go into great detail about it later. I shall simply say that the United States, that great “champion” of Central American co-operation and unity, was not happy to see us Central Americans getting together in this way and looked for a way to put an end to this Association of Central American Foreign Ministers. It did so by creating what was at the time called the Central American Democratic Community. The purpose of that Democratic Community was to exclude Nicaragua from the Central American dialogue; that was how it was construed by everyone. The Government of Mexico very clearly and categorically declined to attend that meeting and said that Mexico did not belong to tlitist or exclusive clubs. Representatives will also remember how often President Royo of Panama very clearly denounced that Central American Democratic Community as something which had as its fundamental purpose the isolation of Nicaragua. 154. At that time I had occasion to talk with the then President of El Salvador, Jest Napolebn Duarte, whoand I speak quite frankly-told me personally that it was obvious and could not be denied that this whole idea of the Central American Democratic Community had been 155. The Central American Democratic Community failed, and the State Department was then obliged to try something else. So it came up with the famous Enders forum, called the Forum for Peace and Democracy. Representatives know that that was another failure and was also condemned in many countries and the international press as a further attempt to isolate Nicaragua. 156. Now that the United States Government considers that it has a greater capacity to bring pressure to bear on various Central American countries than when we organized the Association of Central American Foreign Ministers at San Jose, it says that it is ready for Nicaragua to take part in a dialogue with the other countries, What is the purpose if not to protect its tool in the aggression against Nicaragua, namely the Government and army of Honduras? 157. That was what I wanted to make clear so that no one should be mistaken in thinking that the Government of the United States is the champion of the cause of unity and co-operation in Central America. It has been and continues to be the main enemy of such unity and cooperation

The hour being late, I shall try to be very brief. 159. I would simply note that one hears here a very great deal of falsification of history and of current events. The first point that I should like to make concerning these most recent falsifications is simply that the United States is neither a champion of Central American cooperation nor an opponent of Central American cooperation. If the countries of the region desire to meet together to try to work out solutions to their problems, the United States poses no obstacle to that. No more do we pose obstacles to the desire of, shall we say, Libya and Chad to try to find solutions to their problems within the framework of the OAU or that of any other nations of the United Nations that have come before this body and prefer to find regional solutions, The United States neither champions that nor opposes it. We believe in general in the right and the practicality of nations most immediately involved in conflicts seeking to work out solutions to their problems. 160. Secondly, the United States has not invaded Nicaragua and does not intend to do so. The most the United States has been reproached with or accused of by serious people is providing arms and advice to Nicaraguans fighting for their right to national self-determination. 161, Thirdly, concerning one more falsification-who has done what with regard to what meeting at what Past time-the past is always less important than the present. The principles that are presumably at stake here are rela- “self-determination and non-interference in the affairs of other States,. . . the obligation not to allow the territory of a State to be used for committing acts of aggression against other States, the peaceful settlement of disputes and the prohibition of the threat or use Of force to resolve conflicts”. 162. To the best of my knowledge, the basic problem that confronts the region is that one State in the region, namely, Nicaragua, is unwilling to affirm respect for the territorial integrity of other States and is unwilling to affirm its obligation not to allow its territory to be used for acts of aggression against another, yet still claims for itself unique enjoyment of those rights. 163. I believe that the Security Council should see very clearly that the United States, and, I suspect, all the other States involved in the Contadora process, except perhaps Nicaragua, are willing to agree in very short order to respect the principles of self-determination, noninterference in the affairs of other States, the non-use of the territory of one State for acts of aggression against another, the peaceful settlement of disputes and the prohibition of the threat or use of force to resolve conflicts. 164. There has been a reference to the dreams of the people of Central America. The people of Nicaragua have dreams too, and those dreams have been very cruelly betrayed. I believe that, if the Government of Nicaragua would simply keep the promises it has solemnly made to its own people-which promises we have frequently reviewed here-with respect to human rights and democratic processes, if it were willing to live jn peace with its neighbours, if there were the will to do those things and to respect the principles of the Charter, the precise format in which those questions were discussed and decided would turn out to be quite unimportant. 165. Mr. D’ESCOTO BROCKMANN (Nicaragua) (interpretation from Q&r/r): On this occasion, as on many former occasions, it is hard to understand imperialist logic, and why, in the light of the unquestionable fact that my country is being attacked from a neighbouring country, Nicaragua should be described as the aggressor country, I do not believe that I have to prove again something which I am sure the Council fully understands. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations publications may be obtained from booksrores and distriburori throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write lo: United Nations. Sales Section. New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies son1 en vente dans les Iibrairics et les apences dCpositairca du monde entier. Informcz-vous aup& de votre librairc ou adresscz-vous P : Nations Unies. Section des ventes, New York ou Gentve. KAK I-lOJIYYMTb M3~AHMR OPl-‘AHMJAlJMM OFbEAMHEHHbIX HAUMfi kf,flaHHR OpraHKIaUNH 06t.C,WHCHHblX HauHB MOZUHO KyllHTb B KHlI~HblX uara31lHaY ware~rcTsaxsoacexpa~O~aXMHpa. HaBOnHTCcnpaEKw O~H~~PHHRXBB~IIJ~SI KHII;);NO%I Mara3HHe HJ-IW nWuWTe no aapecy: OpraHK3aUHI 06%CnHHCHHblX HatuG?, CCKUIIR no nponaw ki3aawiR, Hbkdlopti ww TeHeea. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estln en vcnta en librerias y casas distribuidoras en todas partes del mundo. Consulle a su librcro o dirfjasc a: Naciones Unidas. Seccidn de Venras. Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York 00400 90-60205-January 1991-2,050