Panama, 1982

Mr. President, your many years of association

with the United Nations, during which you have

demonstrated your wisdom, spirit of co-operation

and human qualities, have earned you your

election, which guarantees the successful outcome

of our work for all States Members of the United

Nations. We welcome your presidency of the

General Assembly and should like to pledge the

determined co-operation of the delegation of

Panama. I am expressing the feelings of broad

sectors of mankind when I say in addition that we

wish to praise the outstanding job done by the

distinguished statesman of the third world, Mr.

Ismat Kittani, as President of the thirty-sixth

session of the General Assembly. He is a tireless

promoter of the ideals of the United Nations.

3. Never before in the history of mankind has

there been so many sombre political and economic

factors as there are today which have created

such an ominous world situation.

4. Even for those who maintain that international

law is an instrument of co-ordination and not

confrontation, the major problems on the

Assembly's agenda place us at a crossroads where

negative factors in international life bring us

to an impasse. There is the prospect of another

possible conflagration with unpredictable results

if common sense, wisdom and determination do not

prevail in promoting the ideals. purposes and

principle§ which inspired the authors of the San

Francisco Charter to draft a system of collective

security within the sphere of the United Nations

for dealing with the major conflicts of our era

which threaten to bring about the

self-destruction of mankind.

5. In the peaceful settlement of

disputes •and in cases of breaches of

international peace, we find ourselves confronted

with an impossible mission owing to the lack of

political will on the part of the members of the

Security Council, and in particular of tf1:.e

permanent members. To undertake the task of

making the United Nations system of security

effective and imposing the coercive measures

contempl3ted in the Charter. This action is

necessary and urgent in situations as

anachronistic and offensive to the conscience of

mankind as those occurring in Africa, the Middle

East, the eastern Mediterranean, Asia and Latin

America, especially in the Latin American South

Atlantic.

6. The large, medium-sized and small Powers in

this world assembly cannot do much in the way of

making a positive contribution as regards events

which have occurred in 1982. There has been no

progress in the global negotiations which created

so much hope at one time as a means of realizing

the aspirations of mankind embodied in the

International Development Strategy for the Third

United Nations Development Decade.

7. The second special session of the General

Assembly devoted to disarmament resulted in'

resounding failure in the face of the

intensification of the arm race between the

super-Powers of the East and the West.

8. As far as the non-aligned group is concerned,

we were saddened to see that as a result of the

fratricidal war between Iraq and the Islamic

Republic of Iran it has not been possible to hold

in Baghdad the Seventh Conference of Heads of

State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries in

which such hopes had been placed. The cycle had

then been broken which caused the non-aligned

countries, representing two thirds of mankind, to

meet at the level of heads of State or Government

in order to bring here to the Assembly their

positive, strong non-aligned influence projecting

the peace-loving doctrines of Nehru, Tito,

Nasser, Makarios, Pandaranaike and other great

apostles of peace.

9. The injustices in the economic relations

between the developed countries and the

developing countries have become more severe in

this ominous framework of inflation, public

indebtedness, growing unemployment and economic

crisis afflicting the poor countries particularly.

10. UNCTAD, which during the past two decades had

aroused the hopes of the developing countries,

was originally scheduled to hold a session in

Havana in 1983, but, for well-known reasons, it

will not be held in that city. The preparations

for Belgrade have been adversely affected by

negative factors pertaining to economic relations

and by the hard position lak n by the developed

countries in regard to the legitimate demands of

the countries of the third world.

11. There are more and more reasons why the

non-aligned movement and the Group of77 should

intensify their efforts to strengthen those

movements and bring about collective

self-sufficiency so that the developing countries

will be able to establish, in an effective and

substantial manner. real and significant economic

co-operation. To the extent that political and

economic difficulties increase because of the

resurgence of colonialism and hegemonism on the

part of the major Powers, the developing

countries must strengthen co-operation among

themselves both politically and economically.

12. The colonial aggression that Latin

America had to endure in the spring of 1982 has

reaffirmed the fraternal ties of unity,

cooperation and solidarity among the countries of

the region.

13. One positive event which should be

stressed is the eighth meeting of the Latin

American Council, the supreme body of the Latin

American Economic System, which took place at

Caracas at tile ministerial level in August 1982.

Apart from support for Panama in the

implementation of the Canal Treaties, which we

have noted with gratitude, the most outstanding

achievement of the meeting was the adoption of

the programme of action for the implementation of

the measures provided for the Panama Declaration

on economic relations between Latin America and

the United States, adopted on 1 December 1981 at

the high-level consultative meeting of the Latin

American Economic System, which took place on the

date in the capital of my country. The Latin

American Council, in its Decision 114, decided to

endorse the Panama Declaration contained in

Decision 87, which, as was stated by our Foreign

Ministry:

“…after. stressing the inequality in the terrors

of trade between the United States and Latin

America as a factor that obstructs economic,

financial and social development in the Latin

American region, establishes a programme of

collective co-ordinated action and a working plan

to rectify the asymmetries in the aforementioned

trade. The document sets forth a common strategy

for Latin America in these negotiations, based on

the criteria and actions which the plan defines.

The program the plan encompass all aspects of

United States-Latin American economic relations

and offer a series of recommendations which the

countries of the region should take into account

in their economic relations, both individual and

collective, with the United States."

In the programme and in the plan to which I have

referred, there are set forth in a positive

manner fundamental principles to place, within

the framework of justice, equity, good

understanding and co-operation, the relations

which have existed between this group of

countries and the United States.

14. Panama is situated in the extreme south of

the Central American isthmus and practically in

the middle of the so-called Caribbean basin. Its

history and its geography have bound us

indissolubly to Central America, to the

Bolivarian countries and to the Antilles. Our

geographical function, as a bridge between the

oceans, has linked us with practically all the

markets and countries of the world. Ever since

the present Panama Canal was built it has, in

addition, brought about special relations with

the United States.

15. At the same time Panama is one of the

countries with the most stable economic, social

and political regimes in an area beset by complex

social and international problems with dangerous

implications. My country has the unavoidable

responsibility of playing a role as conciliator.

as part of the political

efforts to overcome the crisis which might very

web turn the region into a disaster zone.

16. In defining that role, I should like to

recall that the stability that exists in my

country is due to the fact that in the past

decade we have made consider-able progress

towards peaceful revolution. Structural reforms

have been carried out which have brought about a

social and territorial redistribution of wealth

that is much more just and balanced, and mixed

and co-operative state sectors have been created

with a productive economy, conceived of from the

social point of view. Social security, education,

health and communications have been considerably

enhanced. A system of representation and popular

participation in the political decision-making

process has been created. National integration

has been improved.

17. In contrast with many other countries of

the region, these economic, social and cultural

changes n:move the main causes of injustice,

repression and social discontent which are at the

root of the political disputes that have

di5rupted many countries in the area or have

polarized their relations.

18. My country cannot be indifferent to the

climate of violence and the warlike acts that

have occurred in the region--either for ethical,

political or security reasons. Internal tension,

to which should be added outside interference of

one kind or another, in support

of one side or another in conflicts, has already

created a structure of militarization of forces

and alliances which could at any moment lead to a

wide-spread conflict. This would have

uncontrollable consequences and could cause

bloodshed and inevitably jeopardize the entire

international situation and destroy the region.

19. Hence, for the past decade, Panama has been

pursuing a regional policy that is most

definitely aimed at trying to bring about a

peaceful settlement of the problems of the area.

We want to avoid a spiral of internal

confrontations continuing in the region-this has

already taken on genocidal proportions and has

led to warlike acts between sister countries. We

have found ourselves in considerable agreement

with Mexico and Venezuela as we have sought

solutions by means of multilateral political

negotiations among all the parties in dispute

within our area.

20. For this reason, too, we have promoted the

principle, the right and the duty of maintaining

good relations with all countries of the region

without exception, though they may have political

systems different from our own. Peacefully we

have defended the principle, the right and the

duty of preserving the neutrality of Panama both

as regards the forces in dispute in the area and

as regards the super-Powers. We are aware that

ongoing dialogue and under-standing with all the

other countries and forces, aimed at detente and

harmonious coexistence, are the only way to

restore security in the area and preserve

international security and the security of our

own country.

21. We want Panama to be a forum and an 'active

communicator or intermediary in the bringing

about of agreements aimed at detente, and we do

not want to be one of the parties to a

confrontation. For this reason, and in the best

diplomatic traditions of my country, we have

refused to be part of any blocs or pacts that

would exclude other countries, although in

certain cases we have no doubts about their good

intentions.

22. Stability in Panama is also largely due to

the fact that during the past decade complex

negotiations have been held with the United

States regarding the status of the Panama Canal.

The TreatiesI that arose from those negotiations

met a large number of the national demands of

Panama. In this respect Latin American solidarity

was of decisive assistance, as was the solidarity

of the third world countries and others, which

encourage us in our anti-colonialist policies.

Although we did not obtain everything to which we

were entitled, great progress was made and the

new Canal Treaties establish much mere balanced

relations between Panama and the United States.

23. My country's rights over the Panama Canal

are beyond any doubt, since it is a waterway fed

by Panamanian fresh water and we have certain

rights that spring from the permanent sovereignty

of my country over its natural wealth and

resources.

24. It is understandable and almost inevitable that

an international pact should be designed to

harmonize the interests of two sovereign

countries that may well have common though not

identical interests. There may, of course, be

differences of interpretation between the parties

when it is a question of implementation. That is

what has happened in this case. In so far as the

stipulations of the Treaty are concerned," Law

96-70 of the United States Congress, which

authorizes the American executive to implanted

the Treaty, gave rise to differences of opinion

between the two Governments. My Government has

made that known to the international community.

25. Last Friday, I October, Ricardo de la

Espriella, President of Panama, and Ronald

Reagan, President of the United States, had a

working meeting in Washington, a meeting of the

greatest importance, five years after the signing

of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties and precisely on

the third anniversary of the entry into force of

those instruments.

26. The purpose of the meeting was to consider

relations between two friendly countries, to

promote complete compliance with the Canal

Treaties of 1977, to bring about more just

economic relations between our peoples and to

make effective the common purpose of creating the

conditions of harmony, justice and understanding

indispensable to the efficient and optimal

functioning of the Panama Canal.

27. One of the merits of the visit of President

de la Espriella was that it brought about in the

news media and United States public opinion an

understanding of the reservations that the

Panamanian Government had had regarding certain

measures and actions by officials of the United

States that were not in harmony with the

Treaties. It is our hope that a just solution to

the outstanding problems will be found, in

particular as regards the elimination of the

discriminatory salary scale known as the Panama

Area Wage Base, which as a result of actions by

the Panamanian leader, might be replaced by a

general salary scale that is not discriminatory

if, as we hope, the United States co-operates

with Panama in the achievement of that result at

the next meeting of the Board of Directors of the

Panama Car.al Commission, which will take place

in November in Washington.

28. We should like to add that perhaps the

most serious concern f my Government in this

area has to do with a proper understanding of the

spirit and purpose of the Treaty concerning the

Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama

Canal.

29. Neutrality for the inter-oceanic waterway

is a goal that my country has never been willing

to abandon. Its security cannot be based on

military considerations. We want the Canal at all

times-in times of peace and in times of war-to be

a path of concord open to all the countries and

nations of the world. We have never wanted the

Canal to serve warlike purposes. The Canal needs

security in a world like ours, in which,

notwithstanding the existence of the United

Nations, war 'and the use of force remain means

of settling differences or international

disputes. We nevertheless consider that the

security of the Canal is based on relations of

goodwill, friendship and co-operation among

nations.

30. Defence of the Canal must be within the

Canal, from the Canal and for the Canal. We

cannot accept the possible use of armed forces

stationed there or the weapons stocked there for

missions or warlike actions outside the borders

of Panama. We do not want our land or the Canal

built in Panamanian territory to be used for

actions that undermine the neutrality that Panama

has declared to the entire world. We do not want

to be exposed as a military target to the

uncertainties or risks of war that are so alien

to us in terms of both motives and aims.

31. Such are the purposes of the neutrality

Treaty, and we have therefore called upon all the

nations of the world to adhere to the Protocol

attached to that Treaty. We should like to renew

that call on this occasion.

32. According to the Charter, the United

Nations and regional bodies are mechanisms for

collective security and indispensable for the

maintenance of international peace. It is only

logical that in order for them to be effective

this international body must encompass, without

exception, all countries that have a right to

membership.

33. The results of the last world

conflagration and the cold war for many years

made it impossible to obtain the goal of

universality for the United Nations. As examples

we need only cite the opposition to the admission

of the representatives of the People’s Republic

of China for 23 years and the resistance to

admission to membership of Spain, which was

finally admitted together with 15 other countries

in E'55. In this latter case it was clear that

the establishment of diplomatic relations and the

exchange of ambassadors and ministers with a

Government does not imply any judgement regarding

the national policies of that government.

34. Votes that are cast in the General Assembly

for reasons of State do not always reflect the

will of the peoples. In the cases that I have

mentioned, and in many others, votes are often

cast for reasons that arise from certain

circumstances, and at times only later do

justice, reason, common sense and good-will

prevail internationally and in the

decision-making process of Governments, which

then express their goals in international forums.

35. The same things happen regionally;

sometimes the smooth functioning of a region is

impeded when important sectors do not participate

in the system.

36. Over the years Panama has maintained that

there is a need to restructure the bodies and

norms of the inter-American system. In our

opinion, if the Organization of American States

[VAS] is to be effective it must be a pluralist,

all-encompassing forum open to dialogue dealing

with more just economic relations in the American

continent, like the North-South dialogue, with

the participation of all the nations of the

western hemisphere.

37. Viewed thus the OAS will require as an

essential distinction should be drawn between

meetings which element the contribution of the

United States, and the incorporation of Canada

would be desirable. The incorporation or the

reincorporation of those States of Central

America and the Caribbean which are not now part

of and have been excluded from the organization

would indeed be indispensable.

38. In the inter-American system, situations

arise which deserve serious and the dispassionate

consideration, bearing in mind the interests of

the States of the region. Frequently the question

is asked: can the GAS function effectively

without the United States? The answer is,

obviously, that it cannot, on the understanding

that the United States, like other member States,

accepts the obligations set forth in the charter

of the OAS and in the other agreements of the

inter-American system and provided that it

complies with those agreements.

39. There is no doubt that within a regional

system properly understood, it would be

appropriate to ask if the OAS, which is

experiencing a profound crisis, would be able

to function effectively without the

participation of Belize, Canada, Cuba, Guyana and

Puerto Rico. .

40. The primary task of this new institutional

conception of the inter-American system would be,

in the political arena, examination of the

Central American question and of the Caribbean,

normalization of relations between Cuba and the

United States, eradication of colonial enclaves

in Latin America, the status of the Malvinas

Islands and of the Guantanamo naval base and

territorial disputes between the countries of the

area, as well as exploration of the possibility

that in this year, which marks the bicentenary of

the birth of the Liberator Sim6n Bolivar, a

fraternal solution might be found by which

Bolivia might attain its legitimate aspiration to

the sovereign outlet to the sea of its

forefathers.

41. In the economic sphere, the inter-American

forum' must undertake the task of considering the

economic relations between Latin America and the

United States of America, to place them in adjust

and equitable con-text, serving as a forum for

negotiations within the frameworkof North-South

relations.

42. The problems besetting the region are

numerous in the area of trade, commodities,

financing, trans-national corporations, foreign

investment and the might be convened by the

OAS within the inter-American system and

meetings of a consultative or other nature at the

purely Latin American Ievel.

43. The idea of holding in Caracas 0" 24 July

1983, or an appropriate date, a Latin American

‘Summit conference to commemorate the second

centenary of the birth of the Liberator has been

linked to the holding of a conference of Foreign

Ministers of Latin America which might take place

in Panama City, headquarters of the Amphictyonic

Congress of 1826, which was convened by Bolivar

on the eve of the Battle of Ayacucho in 1824. At

the same time, initiatives have been taken by the

Governments of Uruguay and Colombia regarding the

holding of an inter-American meeting of heads of

State or Government of the region.

44. In order to dispel any confusion on this

matter, a distinction should be drawn between

meetings which might be convened by the OAS

within the inter-American system and meetings of

a consultative or other nature at the purely

Latin American Level. The former, on

inter-American meetings, are held within the

framework of the OAS, a regional organization

which the United States and the Latin American

countries belong as of right, with the exception

of Belize, Cuba and Guyana, which are not members

of the regional body.

45. The twelfth general assembly of the OAS,

which will be attended by the foreign ministers

of the United States and member States, will be

held in a few weeks, in November of this year, in

Washington. It would not be logical to consider

the possibility of an inter-American meeting of

Foreign Ministers in December, as the November

meeting will offer an opportunity to consider at

that level matters of common interest to the

countries of the area.

46. A different matter would be a

consultative meeting or a meeting to deal with

matters contained in a previously agreed agenda,

attended by all Latin American countries,

including Belize, Cuba and Guyana, which are

excluded from the OAS.

47. The Secretary-General of the OAS, Mr.

Alejandro Orfila, effectively helped to clarify

the situation when, on 14 September, he went on

record in favour of the proposal for a

hemispheric meeting of heads of State becau.se,

in his opinion., it is necessary to bring

inter-American relations up to date. In his

statement, Mr. Orfila visualized an

inter-American summit meeting within the

framework of the OAS and, of course, without the

participation of Belize, Cuba and Guyana.

However, Mr. Ortila went on to say that it is

truly essential for Latin America to reach

agreement on its own points of view, before those

views are brought up at the hemispheric level.

What Mr. Orfila meant was that this was a Latin

American meeting, by Latin Americans and for

Latin Americans. This cannot be interpreted in

any other way.

48. In his statement, Mr. Orfila considers the

feasibility of a exclusively Latin American

meeting at which, logically, Behze, Cuba and

Guyana, which are Latin American countries, would

also participate.

49. The Latin American meeting, which is

different from the inter-American meeting, would

then be the framework within which, without

hostility or antagonism towards any country,

great or small, an effort would be made to

reach agreement on positions and strategies in

the political and economic spheres to defend• and

,promote common interests of Latin American,

countries.

50. The fact that the Inter-American Treaty of

Reciprocal Assistance,2 that is, the Treaty of

Rio de Janeiro of 1947, was ineffective during

the South Atlantic crisis has naturally caused

concern in all sectors of the Latin American

region concerning the future of collective

security for the countries of the hemisphere.

This is unquestionably a matter deserving of the

closest attention on the part of the Latin

American countries. It should be the subject of

consultations between them, in an effort’s to

define onceand for all tile fate of this regional

agreement. A Latin American consultation on that

subject should precede a hemispheric meeting

which, without doubt, must also, include in its

agenda the status of the Rio Treaty.

51. Lack of timely action would, in our opinion,

mean that consideration might once again be given

at title Seventh Conference of Heads of State or

Commitment of Non-Aligners Countries, to be held

b New Delhi in 1983, to the proposal to denounce

the Rio Treaty put forward by the host country at

the Sixth Conference held in Havana in 1979. That

proposal was not discussed then because of

Panama's firm opposition to that action. which it

considered inopportune at that time, but it has

been given a new dimension by the Malvinas crisis.

52. International relations are now subject to a

caustic cold war dialogue. Local confrontations

have spread to other spheres and there are

legitimate fears that the lack of understanding

and communication which make possible peaceful

intercourse among nations in conflict can

gradually lead to a third world war.

53. Latin America has its own cultural

characteristics and common interests of an

economic and social nature. as well as historical

roots which bind us to the nations of Central

America. South America. Mexico and the Caribbean

as a regional group with well-defined qualities

of its own.

54. The community of Latin American nations

attaches the highest importance to ail its

relations with the United States and is seeking

to develop them in a harmonious. friendly and

cordial way in a spirit of reciprocal

co-operation and of respect for its territorial

integrity, sovereignty and independence and for

the principle of the sovereign equality of

States. When these relations have an adverse

effect and when there is tension or friction

between Latin American countries or between us

and the United States as is the case with Cuba

and Nicaragua, there is natural concern. 'as

expressed b) the President 'Of Mexico, Jose L6pez

Portillo, and the President of Venezuela, Luis

Herrem Campins, and a desire to seek the path of

conciliation, understanding and peace.

55. The regional bodies bringing together

exclusively Latin American countries. which

historically were brought together by Bolivar,

who wished to guide them towards unity and

integration are today a political reality which

is part of the system of international relations.

56. The most representative Latin American

bodies are part of' the group of Latin American

States within the' United Nations system and the

Latin American Economic System, which is not only

a mechanism for Latin American consultation and

co-ordination but also a part of its strategy of

conducting economic relations under the wise,

skilful and admirable leader-ship of the Latin

American statesman, Carlos Alzamora, to whom

Panama expresses the appreciation and gratitude

of the Latin American countries for what he has

done to promote the genuine interests of Latin

America.

57. In general, the regional organizations

constitute a typical example of modern

international law. This is not just a phenomenon

pertaining to our region. Just as there is within

the United Nations the regional Latin American

group, there are also, as independent and

separate entities, the group of Western European

and other States, which includes the United

States, the African group, the Asian group and

the .Eastern European group.

58. The importance of the regional groups of the

third world of manifested by the Group of 771

made up primarily of the States of the Asian,

African and Latin American groups. Its work

affects the North-South dialogue has to do with

the International Development Strategy for the

Third United Nations Development Decade, the

1980s, the process of global negotiations' and

the adoption of criteria for programmes of

action. As regards the sessions of UNCTAD, the

sixth session will take place in Belgrade in

1983; each and Every regional group of the world

including the Latin, American group, through the

Latin American Economic System holds coordination

meetings prior to UNCTAD sessions, which lead to

a plenary meeting of the Group of 77, where

spokesmen from. Latin America. Africa and Asia

set forth criteria on each subject which will be

put forward at the UNCTAD session.

59. This explains why there are purely Latin

American bodies with the right to participate on

an equal footing as the Asian and African groups,

and the group of Western Europe and other States,

which includes the United States, the Eastern.

European group and other organizations made up of

countries with common interests, such as the

Organization

60. Latin America rightly wished to strengthen

its capacity to negotiate within and outside this

hemi-sphere using purely Latin American

machinery. Latin America wants Latin American

solutions to Latin American problems, from a

Latin American point of view, implementing

principles of friendship and" co-operation with

an countries of the world in accordance with the

Charter of the United Nations.

61. The designs of the former colonial empires do

not change in their anachronistic attempts to

control the maritime routes to nearby countries

in the ocean spaces to which they attribute

strategic values. Both here in the Assembly and

.in the Security Council, and in other

international forums, we have said that

colonialism is reprehensible and must be

eliminated: regardless of the State or States

practising It. We maintain that colonialism is an

evil wherever it arises. In the inter-American

system colonialism has no legitimacy. The concern

expressed in t 940 by the Foreign Ministers of

the States of the Americas as regards Nazi

occupation of European countries with possessions

in the Americas must, of course, apply to the

eradication of colonial situations which still

endure in this hemisphere, as Bolivar stated when

the Panama Congress was convened.

62. In accordance with its anti-colonialist

position, which is one of the constant features

of Panama's foreign policy, we support

Argentina's sovereign claim to the Malvinas

Islands. Panama considers that from the historic

and legal point of view these islands and the

adjacent waters are part of the territory of the

Republic of Argentina. This was the position in

law and in fact until, 150 years ago, Great

Britain, pursuing its imperialist designs, which

had resulted in the domination of oceans and

continents, set foot on those islands against the

will of Argentina.

63. The British colonial presence there today is

inconsistent with the principles of the Charter,

con-firmed and developed in so many General

Assembly decisions to constitute a consistent

body of legal norms condemning colonialism and

expansionism, which must be respected by all

Members of the Organization.

64. Faithful to these decisions, my Government,

together with other Latin American countries,

sup-ported the request by 20 Foreign Ministers to

include this item in the agenda of this session

of the General Assembly, in the hope that by

means of negotiations under the aegis of the

United Nations and on the basis of the principles

and norms of inter-national law a final solution

might be found to this problem, which disrupted

international peace and security at the cost of

so many human lives.

65. This final solution must be based on the

return to Argentine sovereignty of the Malvinas

Islands and their dependencies, the early

withdrawal of British forces and the adoption of

a statute guaranteeing the orderly transfer from

British administration to Argentine

administration, safeguarding the interests of the

employees of the English Falkland Islands Company

and the British nationals who are residents of

the islands.

66. The case of the Maivinas Islands, which with

its adjacent seas is de jure under the

sovereignty of the Republic of Argentina, may be

seen as similar to that of Namibia, which is so

dear to the nations of southern Africa. South

America has invoked security needs to prolong its

arbitrary occupation of Namibia, saying that the

Cape route, as a means of access to the South

Atlantic and European and North American ports,

is essential to the survival of western

civilization. .

67. In both cases the colonial Powers have raised

obstacles to the settlement of nationals of the

countries under colonial oppression and almost

isolated the occupied territories to keep out

anything which might go against the colonial

structure, manipulating the demographic

composition of the territories subjected to their

colonial domination for their own evil purposes.

68. This is the Pretoria regime's pretext for

its claim that the territory, waters and air

space of Walvis Bay are an integral part of the

territory of South Africa.

69. This pretension of South Africa's sordid

colonialism which has so frequently been rejected

by the General Assembly, is the same as that

invoked by the United Kingdom of Great Britain

and Northern Ireland to keep the Malvinas Islands

occupied by force. It is argued in England that

occupation of the Malvinas Islands by a State

member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization

[NATO] is essential for the control of the

maritime routes of the South Atlantic and for the

transport of oil from the Persian Gulf to Western

Europe and the eastern coast of the United

States. That is also related to the British

desire to maintain a strategic position in regard

to its designs over Antarctica.

70. With an effrontery equal to that of South

Africa in its claims to control Walvis Bay,

England wishes to take from Argentina by force

the Malvinas Islands, an integral part of its

sovereignty. Africa and Latin America, because of

their anti-colonialist positions, and the rest of

the third world, will not allow the British and

the South Africans to continue in their brazen

attitude and there will soon be independence for

Namibia, including Walvis Bay as an integral part

of its territory, just as the Malvinas Islands

and their dependencies will be returned to

Argentine sovereignty.

71. In the colonial war of the South

Atlantic, Argentina's national honour remained

untarnished. In that southern sea there was a

brave display of heroism and courage by the

Argentine armed forces, who shed their blood in

defence of the integrity of their home-land,

which is also part of the Latin American

continent, and they will make further claims and

show further courage for the homelands of

Sarmiento and San Martin.

72. In the face of the colonial anachronism,

Latin America will join hands to bring about the

restoration of the Malvinas Islands to Argentina.

Latin American nationalism must achieve that

without delay. Impelled by the ideals and hopes

of the Argentine people, we hope together for

victory. We stand together with them and with the

present and future generations of the heroic

Argentine nation.

73. On 12 October, according to a

communication we have received, there will be a

commemoration around Nelson's Column entitled" A

victory march", an attempt o convey an

imperialist picture of England. Why have they

chosen 12 October? Why Columbus Day? On that day

500 million people celebrate their Hispanic

cultural heritage. Why should they be insulted in

this way? We should like to lodge a protest on

behalf of the many human beings who are offended

by this action, which has no justification in

modern times.

74. The Declaration on the Granting of

Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples

adopted by the General Assembly in resolution

1514 (XV) of 1960 solemnly proclaimed the need to

bring to a speedy and unconditional end to

colonialism in all its forms and manifestations,

an end to all practices of segregation and

discrimination. That charter on decolonization is

part of the spirit of our era and it is aimed at

the complete elimination of colonialism in the

world and at overcoming the opposition of the

colonial Powers to implementation of one of the

basic, supreme principles of the San Francisco

Charter.

75. There still exist in Africa, Latin

America, Asia and Europe colonial enclaves which

do not belong in today's world. Sources of

conflict are the British enclaves of Gibraltar,

Hong Kong and the Malvinas Islands, which are an

offence to the countries to which they belong and

must be returned to the sovereignty of Spain, the

People's Republic of China and the Republic of

Argentina respectively.

76. Let me take this opportunity to explain

why the Government of China can reject the threat

made by the British Prime Minister and the

allegation that the treaties by which the Manchu

Dynasty granted England the colony of Hong Kong

are valid under international law. Beijing is

right in saying that Hong Kong is part of the

territory of China. The three treaties going back

to the nineteenth century on which Great Britain

rests its case are contrary to inter-national law

because they were unequal treaties; they were

never accepted by the people of China;

consequently Beijing is entitled to recover the

entire colony when the conditions are ripe.

77. These unequal treaties are no longer

relevant. They are like the unequal treaties

which were imposed on Spain in 1713 regarding

Gibraltar and on Panama in 1903 regarding the

inter-ocean waterway. Hong Kong, the Malvinas

Islands and Gibraltar are unjustifiable

anachronisms which are in violation of the

Charter of the United Nations. They threaten

inter-national peace and security. These enclaves

must be returned to the People's Republic of

China, the Argentine Republic and the Kingdom of

Spain, as a sign of respect for the sovereignty

of those countries and in the interests of

justice, in harmony with the spirit of our time.

78. I should like to refer to another subject.

The situation in the Central American isthmus is

a source of constant concern to my Government.

The civil war in El Salvador, the violence and

the terror which have gripped the countries in

the area, endangering the lives of the people,

are rooted in the exploitation of human effort,

the economic and soci91 inequality which has

existed and the violations of human rights and

democratic principles which have prevailed for

decades in the Latin American region. The present

armed confrontation is an extreme and critical

stage in the age-old fruitless struggle of

thousands of men and women of all ages to secure

proper living conditions within an economic,

social and political system which each Central

American country has chosen for itself without

any foreign pressure or interference.

79. As a result of civil war in Central America,

peaceful people have been displaced and

belligerants have been moved across frontiers,

and this has given rise to clashes between the

armed forces of the countries involved in those

movements. Everything is ripe for a conflagration

which could involve the entire region and be a

pretext for open intervention by outside Powers

and an international conflict of enormous

proportions and complexity. That is why

we are alarmed at the increasingly crude language

of the authorities of some countries in the area

who speak glibly of the possibility of war

between certain countries and refuse to foresee

the terrible hardship which would ensue for

thousands of women, children and old people in

the area.

80. All those who can view with equanimity this

sinister possibility, which many in the area

would have us do, recognize that this announced

war would be a disaster for all contending

parties equally. They would emerge from it

impoverished and indebted and in a worse

position, without ever having solved the problems

they have to cope with today.

81. It is the added misfortune of these heroic

peoples that the rivalry of the super-Powers,

which are unilaterally trying to seize world

supremacy, has encroached on the Central American

region, where they are threatening to make into

pawns in their struggles people who seek only

their identity, their independence, their

freedom, justice and bread.

82. In that connection we can say confidently

that Central American problems cannot be solved

without a dialogue. Panama has always been

prepared to promote a dialogue, with the

participation of all interested parties-in

particular, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,

Honduras and Nicaragua.

83. Similar thoughts inspired President de la

Espriella of Panama when lie said that there was

an urgent need to promote machinery for regional

and world reconciliation and to engage in

negotiations about the internal and- external

conflicts of the Latin American region. The

President of Panama also said that he was much in

sympathy with, and supported, the initiative

taken by the Presidents of Mexico and Venezuela,

Mr. Lopez Portillo and Mr. Herrera Campins, to

resolve these disputes by negotiation. These

leaders sent letters to Commander Daniel Ortega

Saavedra, Co-ordinator of the Governing Junta of

Nicaragua, to Roberto Suazo C6rdova, President of

Honduras, and to Ronald Reagan, President of the

United States of America, in an effort to promote

detente and peace in Central America.

84. Panama's position on international affairs

was clearly set out in the speech by Pesident de

la Espriella to the diplomatic corps in Panama on

16 September last, when he said:

"Consistent with the policies of Omar Torrijos,

we have reaffirmed the Bolivarian, Latin America

, neutral and non-aligned states of Panama and

our recognition of the duties arising from that

status. We confirm our country's tradition of

developing friendly relations with all the

peoples of the world, on a basis of equality and

mutual respect, and our constant readiness to

promote detente and the peaceful settlement of

disputes, especially in the geographical area to

which we belong.

"We support the principle of the sovereign

equality of States... We continue to support the

collective purposes of the Latin American

countries and the countries of the third world in

their efforts to bring about a new international

economic order and a new international political

order, based on the sovereignty of States and the

permanent sovereignty of all States over their

natural resources.

"This encompasses-Panama believes-the right to

self-determination, which means that every people

should be able to choose whatever political

system it considers to be in accord with its

interests and wishes, without outside

interference. For this reason, we shall continue

to support the efforts of the peoples to fight

colonialism and defend their independence and

integrity, rejecting all forms of interference

and threats against other countries, especially

those of our area.

"Consistent with our Latin American commitment

and our Bolivarian traditions, we reiterate

Panama's willingness" as the historic site of the

Amphictyonic congress, to be the setting for the

peaceful settlement of the problems of our area."

85. The independence of Puerto Rice) is one task

of the liberating revolution of the Latin

American countries which has been long delayed.

Bolivar and other leaders of the prolonged

struggle started by the rebel-lions for

emancipation knew that their great enterprise in

seeking independence would end only when all the

peoples of the Antilles had rid themselves of the

European colonizers.

86. At the Congress of Panama there was

discussion of the need for concerted action to

bring about the independence of Cuba and Puerto

Rico which were subject to Spanish domination.

That desire is not new in Panama or the other

countries of Latin America. In 1903 Mr. Belisario

Porras, three times President of the Republic and

one of the greatest statesmen of this century

said that the United States was opposed to

Spanish domination of Cuba and Puerto Rico

because it wished to exercise hegemony.

87. It was eight decades after the battle of

Ayacucho before Cuba was liberated, but Puerto

Rico emerged from Spanish domination only to fall

under the domination of the United States. The

people of Puerto Rico must be allowed to decide

on their own the question of their nationality

and the character and structure of their

political organization, free from all pressure

and without any interference from any quarter.

88. The question of Puerto Rico has historic

roots. The fact that it has not been included in

the agenda for this session does not mean that

there is a solution and does not prove that the

problem does not exist. It would be naive to

believe that the votes cast here for reasons of

State reflect public opinion in Latin America..

The debate in the General Committee and in the

General Assembly should warn the administering

Power that the vote of confidence many countries

have given it is not forever.

89 It is' clear that there must be a dialogue

for peace and that an effort must be made to

achieve a permanent, positive solution protecting

the Political and cultural personality of Puerto

Rico. Latin Americans have a special affection

for the people of Puerto Rico and recognize their

right to self-determination and their option to

be part of the Latin American community, on an

equal footing with all the other countries of the

western hemisphere.

90. The question of Lebanon is directly "elated

to the question of Palestine, which is the

central element in the Middle East conflict with

every passing day it is more and more clear that

it is not possible to bring about a just,

complete and lasting peace in the area without

the Palestinian people exercising its

.inalienable national rights.

91. In its resolution 36/226 A of 1981, the

General Assembly, inter alia, strongly condemned

Israeli aggression against Lebanon and the

continuous bombardment and destruction of its

cities and villages, and all acts that constitute

a violation of its sovereignty, independence and

territorial integrity and the security of its

people.

92. Panama rejects and condemns terrorism,

whether Moslem, Christian or Judaic whatever the

source-but we also reject and condemn State

terrorism, which is among the crimes that are the

most execrable and offensive to the conscience of

mankind. The massacre in the refugee camps in

Beirut two weeks ago has horrified the universal

conscience. Men, women, children and old people

were killed in cold blood in numbers that

amounted to genocide.

93. President Reagan, who has conceived a

plan for a Palestinian homeland on the West Bank,

was informed by the French Government of the

chilling and terrible facts, which strike the

hearer to the soul. In his column on 22

September, James Reston reported that when the

French troops arrived at the Palestinian refugee

camps they were allowed to destroy the mines

which had been buried, but the Israeli troops did

not allow them to protect the refugee camps. The

camps were entered by the IsraeIis' "Christian"

allies, who killed the occupants while the

Israeli troops stood on guard outside.

94. The massacres of Shatila and Sabra, for

which world public (\pinion holds the Christian

Phalangists and the State of Israel responsible,

will be an eternal blot on the names of those who

committed this crime against humanity. The

condemnation of the world will hang over their

heads, as a curse of dishonour and infamy, which

will spread through time and space to hang over

the heads of their descendants for successive

generations. Those responsible for this atrocious

crime cannot associate themselves with the

ethical values of Christian or Jewish culture,

which have so much to do with the civilization o

our times.

95. The torture and suffering of the

legendary Maccabees and the tragic martyrdom of

the innocent children of Bethlehem murdered by

the order of Herod have remained in the memory of

mankind in the same way as will the enormity of

the massacres at Shatila and Sabra. The Beirut

martyrs will not have died in vain if their

sacrifice means the birth of the Palestinian

nation.

96. It may be appropriate to remind the Assembly

that, in connection with the Conference of

Ministers• for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned

Countries which took place in Belgrade in 197 ,

on behalf of the Torrijos Government I defined

certain fundamental principles of foreign policy

of the Republic of Panama laid down in successive

non-aligned conferences. These are equally valid

in 1982, and I will repeat what said.

97. The Government of Panama maintains "as a

fundamental tenet of its foreign policy its

rejection of the presence" or foreign military

forces in any country of the world. The

Panamanitm Government does not justify or excuse

any action by East or West against the right to

self-determination and the principles of

non-intervention in the internal affairs of other

States and respect for the sovereignty and

territorial integrity of all States.

98. Panama recognizes that it has an historic

mission to promote the scientific and

technological development of the countries of its

area, in order to bring about their economic and

social liberation and to accelerate their

integration. Panama promotes the idea of Latin

American nationalism, based on solidarity and

recognition of a pluralist reality. Panama

reaffirms its view that we should strengthen that

Latin American nationalism, which is particularly

necessary so that we may deal with our problems,

free from foreign interference, promote the

interests of Latin America and prevent anything

entering into Latin American policies which could

undermine the personality of our peoples and the

sovereignty of our States.

99. Panama devotes priority attention to its

relations with its sister Republics of Colombia

and Costa Rica, which are neighbouring countries.

It recognizes the need to co-ordinate efforts to

promote development and the balance and

harmonious exploitation of our border areas.

100. Panama respects human rights above and

beyond any political or ideological

considerations.

101. Panama, as a signatory of the Declaration

of Ayacucho,3 respects the Treaty of Tlatelolc04

and co-operates in giving effect to the

prohibition of nuclear weapons in Latin America

and the limitation of conventional weapons in

Latin American countries, although that does not

affect our capacity to protect our territorial

integrity and defend ourselves from colonialist

aggression from this continent or other'"

continents.

102. Latin America is anxiously watching the

controversy regarding possession of the

territories of the Esequibo. All the countries of

the Latin American region are confident that this

dispute will be settled by negotiation and will

be resolved rationally, with no room for ill

feeling between neighbouring countries, on the

basis of understanding and a sense of justice.

103. Panama welcomes the efforts to normalize

relations between the United States and Cuba. We

restate our position in support of the

termination of the embargo against Cuba and our

solidarity with that country in its demand for

the return of the Guantanamo naval base.

104. As a result of the good offices of the

countries of the area, we hope that relations of

Grenada and Nicaragua with the United States will

be improved on the basis of understanding,

co-operation and good-neighbourliness.

105. With regard to the Middle East, Panama

believes that existing conflicts should be

settled peacefully within the framework of the

United Nations. A just and lusting settlement,

in the opinion of Panama, must include the

withdrawal of Israel from all occupied Arab

territories and respect for the inalienable

rights of the Palestinian people and the right of

Israel and all the peoples and countries of the

area to live in peace within recognized and

secure boundaries.

106. Panama recognizes the inalienable right of

the Palestinian people to self-determination and

to its own independent State As regards

Jerusalem, Panama, like the Vatican,• does not

recognize the annexation of Jerusalem and

insists on the internationalization of the Holy

Places. Similarly, we do not recognize the

annexation of the' Golan Heights, which belong to

Syria, or the annexation of any other occupied

Arab territory.

107. Panama will continue to call for the

withdrawal of the Turkish army from Cyprus and

for respect for the territorial integrity,

independence and non-aligned status of the

island. We demand. compliance with the relevant

United Nations resolutions and, in particular,

General Assembly resolution 3212 and Security

Council resolution 365.

108. Panama deplores the continuance of the

absurd war between Iran and Iraq, which must be

brought to an end by means of a just and

honourable political settlement which restores

peace between those two sister countries in

accordance with the principles If the Charter of

the United Nations.

109. We hope that the great Korean nation will

initiate a constructive dialogue between the:

com-munities of the North and the South, leading

to the peaceful brotherly reunification of that

great political entity in the Korean peninsula.

110. Tension must be reduced in South-East Asia

and comprehensive politica1 solutions must be

found through negotiations, with the active

participation of all the parties concerned, in

the hope that peace will quickly be restored to

the area.

Ill. As regards southern Africa, Panama is

opposed to racism, racial discrimination,

apartheid, and the unjust oppression by the

Pretoria regime of the great African national

majority. We support unreservedly the aspirations

of the people of Namibia and Azania and reaffirm

our solidarity with the front-line countries and

the national liberation movements of South

Africa, in particular the South West Africa

People's Organization [SWAPO] and the African

National Congress [ANC].

112. Panama, which was the first Latin

American country to recognize the existence of

the Sahraoui Arab Democratic Republic, supports

the right to self-determination of the people of

Western Sahara.

113. Panama was also one of the first

countries to speak out against Soviet

intervention in Afghanistan; calling for

compliance with the resolutions of the General

Assembly demanding the withdrawal of foreign

troops and respect for the territorial integrity

independence and non-aligned status of

Afghanistan.

114. As a maritime country using the Indian

Ocean and belonging to the third world, Panama

maintains its enthusiastic support for the

Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of

Peace, and condemns the rivalry of the

super-Powers of the East and the West in that

area, since it constitutes a threat and a source"

of anxiety to the coastal States of the Indian

Ocean.

115. The ideas expressed by the Secretary-General

in his report on the work of the Organization

[A/3711] are very thought-provoking. Although we

do not wish to make any comparisons with the

reports of his predecessors, in our opinion this

is a document notable for its clarity and

sincerity in describing the 5tuation of the

United Nations and indicating the omissions,

evasions and insufficiencies in the fulfilment of

its responsibilities of under the Charter. The

Secretary-General affirms that these shortcomings

have undermined the confidence of the world

public and makes positive suggestions as to the

action that should be taken to regain that lost

confidence.

116. In 1978, when I participated in the general

debate at the tenth special session, the first

special session of the General Assembly devoted

to disarmament, I said:

"The United Nations, which came into being at the

end of the Second World War as a system of

co-operation and not of confrontation, has not

been able to operate successfully the machinery

provided in the San Francisco Charter for the

maintenance of international peace and security.

Proof of that is to be found in the tragic

conflicts between the Arab nation and the states

of Israel in the Near East, the Calvary of the

Palestinian nations with its inalienable rights

trampled under foot, the infamous aggression and

untold suffering to which the people of Lebanon

have been subjected, the tragic occupation of the

Republic of Cyprus by the illegitimate action of

the Turkish army, the repugnant subjugation of

Namibia by the racist regime of Pretoria, the

abominable imposition of apartheid at the expense

of the vast native majority in South Africa...

the blood!' conflict among sister nations on the

African constraint 2-.nd the reprehensible

colonialist cells which still persist as hateful

blots on the Latin American map:'

117. Without trying to unravel the many

political puzzles of the United Nations, Panama,

during the six years of the past decade that it

was a member of the Security Council, tried to

free that United Nations organ from its inertia,

so that it could carry out its sacred duties

under the Charter.

118. when we began our work of' found ourselves

in a situation similar to that just before the

Second World War, which came about as a result of

the failure of the League of Nations, the cause

of which was the negative attitude of the major

Powers as manifested in their reluctance to take

the enforcement action provided for in the

Covenant, thus robbing the League of its

effectiveness, bringing it into discredit, and

finally to extinction.

119. Hesitancy in dealing with critical

situations that require preventive or corrective

action to deal with conflicts, tensions and

confrontations among Member States; failure to

comply with General Assembly and Security Council

decisions by large, medium-sized and small Member

States; the persistence of the super-Powers in

manufacturing and stockpiling nuclear weapons and

conventional weapons with indiscriminate effects,

including chemical and bacteriological weapons;

the indifference of those countries to decisions

adopted at special sessions of the General

Assembly on disarmament and many other cases of a

similar nature today, as in the past, have led to

dismay and frustration on the part of the peoples

of the entire world.

120. Year after year, we the representatives of

the small and medium-sized countries which make

up the vast majority of the Organization, have

been repeating our denunciations, confirming our

aspirations, casting votes in support of

solutions which are not only just but also

obviously viable; but nothing has changed in the

conduct of the Organization. There have been the

same flouting of the law, the same deplorable

conditions for hundreds of millions of human

beings who are asking only for bread justice and

peace. We have brought these things to the

Assembly's attention and debated them, but they

have resulted only in thousands of pages now

filed away in the archives of this body.

121. All that is the background to the views put

before us by the Secretary-General, which sound

in our ears like a shout of alarm, a cry of

anguish. We must repeat the truth, again and

again, even though it is painful to realize that

whatever we say is a waste of breath.

Nevertheless, it Is impossible to resign

ourselves to the deterioration of the

Organization. This can be halted; it can be

remedied. In carrying out my official duties I

frequently travel throughout tile countries of

the third world; that is why I am certain that

the lack of confidence of peoples in the United

Nations is not a repudiation of the Organization.

They wish [0 revitalize the Organization, and

enable it to solve the vital problems of mankind,

utilizing the plentiful resources available.

122. The small and m': Hum-sized countries will

not renounce their ideals and aspirations, forged

in the fires of the Second World War and

expressed in the Charter of the United Nations.

There will be no slackening of efforts for a just

and lasting peace, no cessation of the call for

collective and personal security. They have not

resigned themselves to oppression, nor have they

lost their faith in right. .

123. They are confident that their firmness

will lead to the removal of the obstacles that

have impeded action by the United Nations and

obstructed the realization of the goals of the

Charter-•the assurance of peace, the

consolidation of security and the establishment

of a new international economic order.

124. The small and medium-sized countries lack

the physical means to build a more erective

system of collective security. But what we can do

is speak out in international forums, as we are

doing in the General Assembly. We can speak in

unison and call on the major Powers to stop their

rivalry and confrontation and to place their

resources and potential at the service of the

United Nations, and implement the

Secretary-General's proposal to hold a meeting of

the Security Council at the highest possible

level to discuss in depth the burning problems of

the inter-national community.

125. We must enhance the dignity of the United

Nations by returning to the spirit which

prevailed at its founding and devoting itself to

the tasks jointly undertaken, in a moment of

enlightenment, by the Powers which had suffered

the material and human devastations of the

Nazi..Fascist aggression .which caused the Second

World War.

126. With a sufficient amount of imagination and

determination we can join forces to keep the

sacred promise to mankind made in the San

Francisco ChaI1er-to save present and succeeding

generations from the scourge of war and

self-destruction.

127. There is still time to heed the appeal of

the non-aligned at New Delhi to turn a page in

the history of mankind, a page revealing an

awareness of our common destiny and the

solidarity of all peoples.