Argentina, 1982

I should like to begin by congratulating the

President on his election to the high office he

has been asked to fill at this session of the

General Assembly. His contribution as President

of this forum will undoubtedly be invaluable in

achieving the success we hope for in the tasks

with which we have been entrusted, especially in

the fulfillment of the principles and purpose of

the Charter.

233. My country would also like to greet,

through him, the friendly nation of Hungary, with

which we have a very close and productive

relationship.

234. Nor can I omit to take this opportunity

to recall the outstanding performance of Mr.

Kittani of Iraq, and to reaffirm our appreciation

of the ability and effectiveness with which he

carried out his task at a particularly difficult

session of the General Assembly.

235. Finally, before I reach the substance of

my statement, I should like, as Minister for

Foreign Affairs of a Latin American country, to

greet most warmly the first Latin American

Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar,

to whom my country is deeply indebted for his

earnest efforts during the South Atlantic crisis

to reach a solution to the conflict.

236. This year my country had to deal with a

grave international crisis rooted in the fact

that even today, on the eve of the twenty-first

century, there remain forms of colonial

domination in the world, despite the efforts of

the Organization and of the overwhelming majority

of its Member States to eradicate them. The

crisis to which I am referring, which resumed in

an armed confrontation between Argentina and the

United Kingdom, would not have taken place had

colonialism and its vestiges been completely

eliminated from the face of the earth.

237. The conflict which took place in the

South Atlantic, comprising the Malvinas Islands,

South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands,

shows that there is as yet no end to the efforts

of the United Kingdom to cling to its colonial

possessions and to maintain its privileges,

something possible only in an international state

of affairs which is based on the existence of

unequal relations, supported in the main by the

crude domination of force.

238. The Government of the United Kingdom has

attempted to obscure the very clear rights of the

Republic of Argentina to claim territories of

which it was divested by force; but the General

Assembly is well aware of the historical

background of the matter and the stubborn British

attempts to distort it have come to naught.

239. Existing cartographic proofs offered by

maps of that time demonstrate that the Malvinas

Islands were discovered by Spanish navigators in

the first half of the sixteenth century. Then,

since the beginning of the seventeenth century,

they were explored by French navigators until

1764, when Louis de Bougainville established the

Port Louis settlement, now Soledad Island, a

situation which gave rise to a Spanish protest

and a subsequent recognition by France of the

sover¬eignty of Spain over these territories. In

1766 Port Egmont was established in the islet of

Trinidad, the only territory occupied by the

British in the Malvinas Islands, from which they

were also expelled by the Buenos Aires Government

on 10 June 1770.

240. Subsequently secret diplomatic

negotiations led to the precarious restitution of

those settlements to the British on condition

that at a later date they would have to withdraw

from them definitively, a commit¬ment which the

United Kingdom fulfilled in 1774. Since then the

United Kingdom virtually forgot all about the

islands until it took them by force in 1833.

241. In the period between 1767 and 1810, a

year when Argentina started on its road to

independence, the Malvinas were administered by

20 governors appointed by the Spanish Crown. The

Republic of Argentina, having become independent

from Spain, then succeeded Spain in all its

rights, including the rights of sovereignty over

the islands which belonged to Spain. By virtue of

this, until 1833, the administra¬tion of the

Malvinas was exercised by six Argentinean

governors, under whose government my country had

the peaceful and exclusive occupation of the

archi¬pelago, without any discussion by the

European powers of our claims, titles and rights

to these territo¬ries. What must be emphasized,

because it is a decisive point, is that the

United Kingdom in 1825 recognized that the

Republic of Argentina was a sovereign State, and

at that time entered into a treaty of friendship,

trade and navigation with Argentina and did not

then voice any reservation with regard to its

alleged rights over the Malvinas Islands or any

other adjacent terri¬tories. This most clearly

demonstrates that the United Kingdom was aware of

the fact that it had absolutely no right over the

Malvinas Islands and archipelago, whose

sovereignty it questions today.

242. On 3 January 1833, eight year^ after

Argentina was recognized as a sovereign State,

and after the signing of the treaty of

friendship, trade and naviga¬tion, British troops

occupied the islands by force, bringing down the

Argentinean flag, expelling Argentinean

authorities and Argentinean citizens, residents

of the area and forcing them to go to Montevideo.

The Argentinean population was thus completely

replaced by a British military garrison.

243. On 15 and 22 January of that same year,

the Government of Argentina sent a protest to the

Charge d'affaires of Great Britain in Buenos

Aires, and on 17 June the Argentine Minister, Don

Manuel Moreno, voiced the most energetic protest

in London. Thus began an uninterrupted series of

Argentinean protests against the British

occupation and in all cases these were

arbitrarily rejected by the Government of the

United Kingdom.

244. The Republic of Argentina never agreed to

the British occupation, nor did it ever give up

its sover¬eign rights over the territory of which

it was divested by force. All this is more than

enough to show the inequity of any claims of

acquisition by the United Kingdom.

245. Let the Assembly compare the historic and

con¬sistent stand of my country with the silence

of Great Britain in 1825 and its ominous

aggression of 1833.

246. Let us come back now to our times.

Following the creation of the United Nations the

treatment in the Organization of the item of

decolonization brought with it the adoption of

the well-known General Assem¬bly resolution 1514

(XV), which deals with decoloniza¬tion, as well

as resolutions 2065 (XX) and 3160 (XXVIII) and

31/49, which is specifically applicable to the

case of the Malvinas.

247. It was thus decided, first, that there

was recog¬nition of the existence of a dispute

over sovereignty between the Republic of

Argentina and the United Kingdom, secondly, an

invitation to those Govern¬ments to continue

forthwith negotiations to achieve a peaceful

solution of the matter, bearing in mind the

provisions and objectives of the Charter, as well

as the interests—not the wishes—of the population

of the islands; thirdly, the recognition of the

efforts made by the Republic of Argentina to

facilitate the decolonization process and to

promote the well-being of the population of the

islands.

248. Starting in 1966 negotiations began

between the two Governments but these

negotiations did not lead to any result because

of the indifferent attitude and dilatory tactics

displayed by the British.

249. Acceptance by the United Kingdom of the

invita¬tion to negotiate on the matter of

sovereignty, for¬mulated in resolution 2065 (XX),

was embodied in the communications of Foreign

Ministers Zavala Ortiz and Stewart,'3 as a result

of the visit of the latter to Buenos Aires in

1966. Clearly this acceptance was encouraging for

it reflected, apparently, the beginning of a

change in the British position, which up to that

time had rejected all negotiations on the matter

of sovereignty of the archipelago.

250. Later the terms of reference of the

negotiation were formally set out in the joint

communique of 26 April 1977," which stated

specifically that it would include the matter of

sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands, South

Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands. That

agreement between Argentina and the United

Kingdom was explicitly recognized in the parallel

notes addressed in June 1979's by the Per¬manent

Representatives of my country and of the United

Kingdom to the Secretary-General, informing him

that from 21 to 23 March 1979 the representatives

of the Governments of both countries had held the

fourth round of negotiations on the Malvinas

Islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich

Islands, within the framework established in the

aforementioned communique of 26 April 1977.

251. Nevertheless, the obligations undertaken

by the United Kingdom in those documents and 17

years of negotiations failed to convince the

Government of the United Kingdom to deal with the

matter of sover¬eignty fully and in good faith.

That was an arbitrary attitude which could not be

explained in the light of the clarity of the

commitments entered into.

252. On the contrary, my country continued to

demonstrate at all times its sincere resolve to

settle the dispute. Further proof of that was the

letters addressed to the Secretary-General in

1971 by the Permanent Representatives of

Argentina and the United Kingdom^ on opening up

communications between continental Argentina and

the archipelago, for that statement demonstrated

in fact the declared intent of Argentina duly to

take into account the interests of the

inhabitants of the Malvinas.

253. Thus the supply of fuel, the

establishment of regular maritime and air

services, free medical atten¬tion in hospitals on

the continent, the granting of fellowships in

educational institutions and the supply of

foodstuffs are some of the many indications of

the sincere desire of Argentina to continue to

improve considerably the standard of living of

the inhabitants of the islands, which up to that

time had been isolated and had suffered

shortages, which Argentina—not the United

Kingdom—tried to make good in the best interests

of the inhabitants of the Malvinas.

254. One should bear in mind also that along

with this, and from the beginning of the

negotiations, my country repeatedly oHered to

grant guarantees and safeguards under the

protection of the United Nations in order to

preserve the lifestyle of the inhabitants of the

Malvinas, as well as their traditions and

customs, with the idea of considering their

interests, an idea which is contained in General

Assembly resolution 2065 (XX).

255. Nevertheless, despite all the efforts of

succes¬sive Argentine delegations in the rounds

of negotia¬tions, which were once again renewed

at the last meeting in February 1982, it was not

possible to get from the British delegations,

which also included islanders, a list of the

guarantees and safeguards which they required for

the protection of their interests.

256. The positive attitude demonstrated by

Argentina in presenting to the United Kingdom in

February of this year a new proposal for settling

the dispute between the two countries met with

complete silence on the part of the British

Government. That proposal provided for a

machinery to speed negotiations over sovereignty

and achieve concrete results in the form of a

system of monthly meetings, with a

pre-established agenda, the venue of the meetings

established in advance, presided over by

officials at the highest level.

But, as already stated, in accordance with the

usual practice of Britain in matters of

negotiation with our country, we were not able to

obtain a reply to this reasonable initiative by

Argentina, despite the requests made by our

Government.

257. We come now to the episode which

unleashed the present crisis. Argentina received

the British ultimatum to withdraw a group of

civilian workers who had landed on South Georgia

to fulfill a private contract, which was known to

the British authorities, under the threat of the

use of force if their demand was not heeded. That

intimidation was accompanied by the movement

towards that area of various naval units,

including nuclear submarines.

258. Thus the bloodless occupation of the

Malvinas Islands by Argentina was a justified

reaction in the face of the British decision to

strengthen its colonial domination over a

territory which by law belongs to my country and

in flagrant contradiction with the provisions of

General Assembly resolution 31/49. I should like

to emphasize that the recovery of the islands was

achieved without the British suffering a single

death or injury due in any way to the intentions

of Argentina, a country which preferred to

sacrifice many of its own soldiers for the sake

of not causing any victims among the British

occupying forces or the population.

259. Furthermore, I should like to recall that

imme¬diately and without any pre-condition the

Republic of Argentina returned all British

military personnel, along with their flags, in

order to avoid further prob¬lems in trying to

reach a peaceful solution.

260. The recognition by Argentina of the

authority of the Security Council in this dispute

was made quite clear in many statements by my

Government in favor of an effective and full

implementation of Council resolution 502 (1982).

In his statement at this session the President of

Brazil, stressing the importance of the General

Assembly's consideration of the question of the

Malvinas, stated that the first step towards a

solution must be the full implementation of

Security Council resolution 502 (1982), adding:

"It is time for those who so vigorously condemn

the use of force in the solution of controversies

to demonstrate the consistency and sincerity of

their designs".

261. My Government spared no effort in order

to obtain immediately a negotiated settlement of

the crisis, accepting at all times the good

offices offered to us; but we wonder about the

possibility of arriving at a legitimate agreement

when the United Kingdom, seeking no result other

than a military victory and the maintenance of

the colonial situation, brought its fleet into

the South Atlantic unlawfully, invoking Article

51 of the Charter, and arrogated to itself the

right to act, no matter what the consequences, by

taking all sorts of hostile measures.

262. The generous offer made by the Secretary-

General on 2 May this year, to be considered by

both Governments, did not achieve the solution

called for by the serious crisis.

263. The Government of Argentina from the very

outset had full confidence in the role which the

Organization, and especially the

Secretary-General, could play in these grave

circumstances, to help with the maintenance of

international peace and security and to eliminate

all vestiges of colonialism in the world; but the

United Kingdom adopted an extremely rigid

position with regard to the ideas which were

being discussed, an attitude that was closely

related to the increase of its military potential

in the area.

264. Later came Security Council resolution

505 (1982), and a British veto on a draft

resolution'? in the Security Council^ which, if

adopted, would have made possible an immediate

cease-fire, thus avoiding loss of life on both

sides. This was the clearest proof of the lack of

political will on the part of the United Kingdom

to find a peaceful negotiated solution. The only

thing which the British Govern¬ment was

interested in was a success by its punitive

fleet, to consolidate its imperialist presence in

the South Atlantic and improve its damaged

domestic political situation. The facts show that

from the very beginning military action was the

only solution which the Conservative Government

of the United Kingdom seriously considered.

265. I am revealing no secret when I say that

the British Empire only reluctantly gave up its

colonies. Many of the nations represented here

have at one time in their history been colonies

of the United Kingdom and know that their present

situation as sovereign States is not due to any

gracious conces¬sion on the part of that Power,

agreeing m a gesture of generosity to grant them

independence. On the con¬trary, every case of

liberation was the result of a very difficult and

cruel struggle by the oppressed peoples, or of

the final inability of the United Kingdom to

continue exercising its control over those people

in the face of the irresistible force of the

great movement of history leading to decolonization,

generated essen¬tially by the United Nations.

266. The United Kingdom, which today attempts

to act as the champion of self-determination, is

pre¬cisely the colonial Power par which in

many cases raised all kinds of obstacles when the

United Nations tried to assist the just process

which made it possible to liquidate most of its

Empire.

267. Thus, in the specific case of the

Malvinas Islands, the practice of the United

Kingdom thus far has been to pretend to fulfil

the requirements estab¬lished in the resolutions

of the General Assembly, requiring it to

negotiate in the dispute over sover¬eignty, while

in reality sabotaging any serious attempt to make

progress on that important problem. It proceeded

throughout with no sense of haste or urgency,

while striving only to protect its special

private interests, and the monopolistic

exploitation of its colony.

268. The United Kingdom has proclaimed that

Argentina resorted to action in the midst of the

negotiations about the islands. No statement

could be more false. That process has been

frustrated precisely by the dilatory tactics and

delays used time and again by the British

Government, quite apart from its complete failure

to reply to the last proposal made by Argentina

in February 1982.

269. Moreover, I wish to state categorically

that throughout the 17 years of fruitless

negotiations imposed upon the United Kingdom by

the will of the

General Assembly in 1965 in its resolution 2065

(XX), the administering colonial Power of our

Malvinas, South Georgia and South Sandwich

Islands never gave any indication of trying in

good faith to reach a solution to the dispute

over sovereignty which exists between that

country and Argentina, refusing to discuss the

only subject that justified those negotiations

and made them necessary: precisely the question

of sovereignty.

270. Among the basic principles which it sets

forth for the fulfillment of the purposes of the

United Nations, the Charter, in Article 2,

paragraph 2, states that "All Members, in order

to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits

resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good

faith the obligations assumed by them in

accordance with the present Charter". But the

attitude of the United Kingdom constitutes a

flagrant violation of this commitment to which it

subscribed when it signed the constitutional

statute of the Organization, and its actions and

omissions have shown how little importance it

attaches to the resolutions of one of the basic

pillars of the relations in the international

community.

271. Furthermore, if any doubt remained, the

attitude of the present Government of the United

Kingdom is full confirmation that its objective

has always been to continue its usurpation of the

Islands and to accept only those superficial

changes which serve to conceal the true colonial

nature of its domination over them.

272. And if the existence of colonies is an

affront to the dignity of the peoples and a

shameful blot on the name of an international

community which claims to be civilized, even more

shameful is the attempt to invoke the principles

of decolonization to prolong the life of the

ill-omened remnants of an era that fortunately

has come to an end. The Government of the United

Kingdom is trying to whitewash the guilt of its

unlawful occupation by invoking the right to

self- determination of the inhabitants of the

Islands. In so doing, it is attempting to justify

their plundering by invoking the principles that

are generally accepted in the United Nations in

the hope that the nations represented here will

forget all the times when these principles were

ignored or denied by the same United Kingdom

which now invokes them.

273. For if the United Kingdom states that it

is a nation which respects the right of

self-determination, we are faced with a true

historic paradox. How are we then to explain the

struggle for independence and national

sovereignty of India under Gandhi's leader¬ship,

human symbol of anti-colonialism, peace and

justice in our century? How can we forget the

wars of liberation in Africa against British

imperialism ever since the end of the Second

World War? How can we explain the subjugation and

domination suffered by the peoples of Asia at the

zenith of the United Kingdom's imperial

expansion? Could we perchance forget that he

United Kingdom not only violated the true

self-determination of the peoples, but it also

made illegal use of force, violating the most

elementary rules and principles of international

law and ethics? Why did the United Kingdom,

claiming to be such a staunch defender of the

self-determination of peoples, displace by force

the population of the island of Diego Garcia, to

make over that territory for the establishment of

a military base in the Indian Ocean?

Cotild it be perhaps because they were not white,

but Macks and people of mixed Mood?

274. Obviously, it is no mere historical

coincidence that some of the major leaders of the

developing world and champions in our day of the

freedom and independence of peoples—men such as

Nehru, Nasser, Kenyatta, Nyerere and Archbishop

Makarios, among others—had to confront at various

times in their political struggles the colonial

or neo-colonial domi¬nation of British

imperialism.

275. These facts show that when the U „

Kingdom claims to be defending the right to

determination of peoples, that is not only a way

vt concealing the truth about the nature of its

illegal colonial possession of the Malvinas

Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich, but

also a cynical attempt to adjust its position to

the world of today, in order to perpetuate its

last ties of political and economic domination;

in other words, its intent is to seem to change

things so that they can remain the same. The

right to self- determination is basically a

collective right, recognized for all peoples,

nations and States. That right assumes a

legitimate relationship between those who are to

benefit and the territory to be decolonized, but

the territorial link cannot be of any type,

because the right to self-determination can never

be used as an instrument to split up a territory.

276. For example, the settlements established

by Israel in the occupied Arab and Palestinian

terri¬tories—in contradiction of the rights of

the countries and populations affected, and of

the Geneva Con¬vention on the Protection of

Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August

1949, and in flagrant violation of the

resolutions adopted by the Security Council and

the General Assembly—are a clear example of a

policy infringing the right of territorial

integrity. The international community has

rightly condemned such policies, since the

perpetuation of these illegal situations at the

expense of Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and the

Palestinian people year after year has become a

constant source of tension and violence,

endangering not only the Middle East but

international peace and security.

277. Therefore, recognition of the right to

self- determination of a population implanted by

force, after the forced expulsion of those who

were legiti¬mately living in the area earlier, is

a mockery of the efforts of the Organization to

put an end to colonialism, and can lead only to

the renewal of colonialism in the guise of a

settlement freely consented to. The relation¬ship

between those who claim freely to exercise the

right to self-determination and the territory in

which they live must come from a justifiable

situation that existed before the occupation.

278. The clear and maked truth is that the

United Kingdom has established a colony in part

of Argentine territory, and the definitive

solution must be the restitution of that

territory to its legitimate owner, in keeping

with the right of territorial integrity, which

clearly applies to this case, in conformity with

resolution 1514 (XV). Otherwise, I must give

warning that to legitimize the illicit origin of

British pos¬session would be to establish a

dangerous precedent for legitimizing future

seizures of territory, based on the use of force,

yet subject, it would be claimed, to

legitimization by the passage of time.

279. The recent crisis in the South Atlantic prompted the Government

of the United Kingdom not only to seek to

consolidate its colonial domination, this time

quite openly, over the Malvinas Islands and their

dependencies, but also in violation of General

Assem¬bly resolutions, to establish an

extra-continental military base on the islands,

with nuclear submarines and nuclear weapons in

the area.

280. This provocative attitude has clearly

introduced a focus of continuing tension into the

South Atlantic, which is unacceptable both to the

Republic of Argen¬tina and to Latin America. We

must therefore put an end to that state of

affairs. There has been a de facto end to the

hostilities in the area, as everyone knows, and

my Government does not intend to take the

initiative in changing that situation. But

following the cease-fire the United Kingdom

carried out an armed attack on the Argentine

scientific station "Corbeta Uruguay", established

six years earlier in the South Sandwich Islands,

imprisoning the staff, who were carrying out work

of a strictly peaceful nature. That unjustifiable

act of aggression was recently condemned by the

Second World Conference On Cultural Policies,

convened in Mexico by UNESCO.

281. Furthermore, my country has many times

brought to the attention of the Organization acts

of harassment by British vessels and aircraft

against Argentine fishermen, even outside the

exclusion zone which the United Kingdom continues

to impose around the islands for Argentine civil

and military vessels and aircraft. Although

technically limited to an area of 150 nautical

miles, this illegal and arbitrary measure has in

fact been extended by the British Government to

waters outside the area, where Argentine fishing

vessels are constancy subject to intimidation.

This is a serious matter that should be of great

concern to us, since we all recall how during the

recent conflict a British nuclear submarine did

not hesitate to torpedo and sink the Argentine

Republic navy cruiser Genera/

which was sailing outside the exclusion zone

established and defined by the United Kingdom

Government itself—a completely illegitimate and

brutal action which was no source of pride for

British public opinion or any of its allies.

282. The facts that I have just described, as

well as the stand taken so far by the British

Government, opposed to any genuine negotiation,

show clearly the need for the international

community, through a decision by the General

Assembly, to support the Latin American

initiative to resolve the present situation and

the dispute over sovereignty between Argentina

and the United Kingdom by substantive

negotiations carried out in good faith.

283. Latin America is today writing a page in

its history marked by its spiritual umty and its

heroic role, reaffirmed recently by the Panama

Canal issue, and today by the Malvinas question.

284. This unity will be demonstrated in the

forth¬coming meetings of Latin American heads of

State proposed by Uruguay, Panama and Colombia,

in all of which my country will take part. It

will also be demonstrated next year at a meeting,

convened by Venezuela in Caracas, of heads of

State and other representatives of their peoples

to commemorate the bicentenary of the Liberator,

Simon Bolivar, who conceived of our continent as

a federation of nations striving, through the

strength of their common ideals and

determination, to bring about a world of justice

and freedom. With this dream, to which our

Liberator, Jose de San Martin, made his

outstanding contribution, were associated all the

national heroes of Latin America, with a slogan

that we have not forgotten, and are determined

not to forget, calling for respect by the

international community for our demands, today

and for ever.

285. Latin America, united today by the

Malvinas, and tomorrow by whatever other equally

just cause may affect any of the countries

comprising it, calls for a response that will

meet its legitimate demands.

286. Latin America shall not be a

breeding-ground for colonial adventures. The

countries of the hemi¬sphere fought hard to win

their independence and therefore have a long tradition

of rejection of colo¬nialism. Those ideals of the

founding heroes of the Latin American homeland

inspire the actions of the Governments of the

region, with whose decisive assistance and

support the Hrst decolonization ini¬tiatives

prospered in the United Nations. It is in that

spirit that Latin America has demonstrated its

whole¬hearted support for the fraternal

initiative taken by Mexico, which calls for

consideration of the question of the Malvinas

Islands during the current session of the General

Assembly.

287. I emphasize with pride and appreciation

that the question of the Malvinas Islands is no

longer in the Organization the private cause of

my country but has become the cause of Latin

America, as happened also in the case of Panama.

In their letter to the Secretary-General, the

Latin American nations made the following points,

among others:

"The persistence of this colonial situation in

America and the dispute between the Argentine

Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain

and Northern Ireland concerning sovereignty over

the Islands, on which the General Assembly has

expressed itself in resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160

(XXVIII) and 31/49, have led to serious armed

con¬flict in the South Atlantic and constitute a

situation that affects the Latin American region

in particular.

"The countries of America, which are peace-

loving and anxious for a peaceful settlement of

the conflict, consider that the negotiations

between the Argentine Republic and the United

Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

should be conducted under the auspices of the

United Nations/' [Sep

288. That initiative earned the gratitude of

all the Argentine people, for which the cause of

the Malvinas is a national goal which takes

precedence over partisan differences and binds

together citizens of all sectors.

289. We extend the same gratitude to the

non-aligned movement, which in its successive

statements has categorically endorsed Argentina's

claims.

290. I wish to express similar appreciation to

all countries which have extended to us their

support and have recognized the legitimacy of our

claims.

291. The events in the South Atlantic have

taught us some hard but useful lessons, which

will have an impact on our future as a region and

hence on our international relations. We have

felt the warmth of solidarity and the bitterness

of frustration, depending on the reaction to the

legitimate claim of our peoples.

292. We shall never forget those who acted as

our friends. As to those who did not so act, we

shall re-examine in the future their earlier

positions, bearing in mind the circumstances of

that time, which for many were unclear or

distorted. But the positions they are taking now,

will have to stand up to the closest scrutiny by

the Argentine people and by all those who agree

with the very clear principles which the

inter¬national community has committed itself to

defend. Their conduct will be judged not by

Governments, which are temporary things, but by

peoples, which are permanent. History, which is

incorruptible, will be a court of last resort.

The Argentineans and all Latin Americans are

convinced that it will be our ally, not to be

suborned.

293. We firmly believe that negotiations in

good faith between the parties provide the only

possible path to peace. Hence we are prepared to

heed the call of the General Assembly to begin

negotiations to find a peaceful solution to the

dispute over sover¬eignty which will take into

account the relevant resolutions of the General

Assembly and the Security Council, with the

assistance of the Secretary-General, in whom my

country has sincere confidence.

294. Argentina has never expanded its

territory through the use of force. On the

contrary, it has traditional resorted to peaceful

methods and negotiations to resolve its

territorial disputes. In this spirit our country

is committed to the peaceful settlement of its

territorial dispute with the Republic of Chile in

the southern part of the country, with the

invaluable participation of His Holiness Pope

John Paul II as mediator. The people and Government

of Argentina wish to express here their deepest

gratitude to His Holiness for his tireless

mediating activities and his guidance of the

negotiations with the Republic of Chile. Great

importance has been attached by the Holy See to

these activities, which resulted in the agreement

signed on 15 September last at Vatican City. That

agreement is an unequivocal confirmation of the

complete confidence which the two countries have

placed in the Supreme Pontiff and in his judgment

as to the best way to settle the dispute. For our

part, we reaffirm our belief that through

mediation we will reach a final agreement

acceptable to both parties which will put an end

to the dispute once and for all, thus

consolidating the traditional links between the

two peoples.

295. The world situation is so serious, and

the situa¬tion as regards the Organization's

ability to fulfill its purpose of maintaining

peace and acting as a useful forum for

negotiation among its Member States has become so

difficult, that the Secretary-General felt

compelled in writing his exemplary report to

abandon the usual practice of reviewing the broad

range of issues involved in the work of the

United Nations and to concentrate on the central,

vital problem of the chances of achieving the

aims which 37 years ago prompt J the creation of

the United Nations, after the six years of agony

and destruction of the Second World War.

296. In the year since the last regular

session of the General Assembly the deteriorating

trend of inter¬national relations has been

confirmed. The tensions stemming from the

traditional confrontation between the

super-Powers have been aggravated by fighting

resulting from long-standing conflicts which

remain unresolved as a result of the lack of

political will or an intransigent refusal to

confront the problems intelligently and in a

forward-looking way.

297. Thus the lack of trust between

antagonistic blocs or States at the international

level provides the political opportunity for

serious regional crises, and the military pacts

among the great Powers encourage their allies,

whether or not they are in the right, in

exaggerated confrontations or punitive operations

reminiscent of the nineteenth century, although

they use the ultra-sophisticated arsenals of the

late twentieth century.

298. Furthermore, the developed nations, are

en¬trenching themselves m positions of privilege

and when they agree to a dialogue with other

States which are not members of their club they

do so only on their own terms. Fear of change

makes them more inflexible and the climate of

international tension, instead of making them

outward-looking as regards the rest of the world,

makes them turn inward, which is a futile flight

from the collective responsibilities they should

shoulder. Those nations close their ranks to

defend the advantages they gained in the past,

although the injustice of these is obvious. This

is all clear evidence of a process of

international political involution which augurs

ill for the future.

299. We cannot but affirm emphatically here

that if there remains any chance of justice and

right prevail¬ing, it can only be within the

framework of the Organi¬zation, which has the

necessary ways and means to assist nations in

conflict, provided those nations are really ready

for dialogue and negotiations to settle their

disputes. Hence, the international community must

turn towards the United Nations in search of a

reply and for attitudes which encourage the

preser¬vation of world peace.

300. We all know that one traditional way is

through disarmament but, unfortunately, the

present session is taking place in the shadow of

the failure of a few months ago of the second

special session of the General Assembly devoted

to disarmament. The international community had

great hopes in that session, which it expected

would consolidate and develop the achieve¬ments

made in the four years since the first such

special session.

301. But the time is coming when all the

countries, and in the first place the great

Powers, will be unable to ignore the fundamental dilemma

any longer: they must either make sincere and

serious efforts to bring under control the

massive increase in weapons, in particular

nuclear weapons, or we shall be embarking upon an

uncontrollable escalation of which we shall be

the prisoners and probably the victims.

302. The recent events in Lebanon constitute a

further tragic manifestation of the permanent

threat stemming from the perpetuation of unjust

and serious situations not resolved by the

international system, which has once again failed

in Its primary task, established under the

Charter—^namely, that of maintaining

international peace and security. Too many years

have passed during which the people of Lebanon

have had to suffer as a result of successive

violations of their territorial integrity,

independence and sovereignty. This unjust

situation has been com¬pounded in recent weeks by

the barbarous acts perpetrated in the refugee

camps of Sabra and Shatila. This provoked the

unanimous condemnation of the international

community, in which my Government joined first

with a communique issued in Buenos Aires and then

by our vote at the seventh emergency special

session, on Palestine. There can be no doubt of

the responsibility of the Israeli Government

which invaded the city of Beirut in violation of

the agreement reached and on the pretext of

preventing chaos.

303. The Government and people of Argentina

are convinced that ajust and lasting solution of

the question of the Middle East can be achieved,

as my country has argued repeatedly in recent

years, only if there is recognition of and

respect for the inalienable right of the

Palestinian people to self-determination and

national independence and to establish their own

sover-eign Statu; acceptance of the right of

Israel and all countries of the region to live in

peace within inter¬nationally recognized borders;

Israel's withdrawal from all the Arab territories

occupied since 1967 and, in addition, recognition

of a special regime for the Holy City of

Jerusalem, in accordance with the relevant

resolutions of the Security Council and the

General Assembly.

304. Many other situations are subjects of

grave con¬cern to us. The persistence of the

hateful apartheid regime in South Africa and the

unjustifiable delay in the inexorable process of

independence for Nami¬bia, the decolonization of

which must not be further postponed, are just two

of these. South Africa cannot continue to resort

to new and arbitrary excuses to preserve a

shameful and unjust status quo the pur¬pose which

is to deny the Namibian people the true exercise

of their right to self-determination and national

independence in accordance with Security Council

resolution 435 (1978) and with full respect for

its territorial integrity. The international

community must use its best efforts to put an end

to this colonial situation, which is marked by

economic exploitation and racial discrimination.

The people of Namibia must be assisted in their

just struggle to put an end to South African

domination, which flies in the face of the most

elementary principles of justice and equity

accepted by the overwhelming majority of the

States Members of the United Nations.

305. Another grave situation which for reasons

of regional brotherhood concerns us profoundly is

the instability and violence prevailing in

Central America, which prompted the promising

initiative of an offer of good offices by the

Presidents of Mexico and Vene¬zuela, with a view

to reducing tension and ensuring peace. Of

course, my Government has already expressed its

full support for those efforts.

306. I know that it is not original to refer

to the crisis in international economic relations

or to emphasize that the high cost is being borne

by the developing countries. However, despite the

attempts made by those countries to ensure the

establishment of more just economic and political

relations which ensure a proper place and

equitable participation in the international

sphere, some developed countries are working to

prevent these through economic policies that

undermine multilateral co-operation in general

and co-operation for development in particular.

307. There has been a resurgence of

protectionism in the major decision-making

centers, accentuating further the economic and

social difficulties on the periphery.' Selective

and discriminatory policies have been

established, based on concepts of so-called

graduation, which establish arbitrary and harmful

differences for developing countries. By

increasing emphasis on bilateralism in

international economic relations there has been

an erosion of the multilateral framework of

international co-operation.

308. As if all this did not constitute a

sufficiently discouraging picture, we now see a

tendency for certain developed countries to use

economic means for political ends, by trying to

bring pressure to bear on developing countries to

subordinate the exercise of their sovereign

rights.

309. The non-aligned movement has emphatically

condemned such behavior and the Charter of

Eco¬nomic Rights and Duties of States adopted by

the general Assembly in 1974, is also emphatic on

this point.

310. Within the Latin American framework, at

the regional level, it was understood from the

outset, as confirmed by decisions 112 and 113 of

the eighth meeting of the Permanent Council of

the Latin Amer¬ican Economic System, that Latin

America must reduce its vulnerability to the

concerted pressures of the developed world.

311. Nevertheless, in the midst of this

disturbing picture there are on the horizon some

positive facts, such as those originating in the

Group of 77 and the recent statements made in the

Economic and Social Council by some

industrialized countries, which lead us to hope

that global negotiations can begin shortly in an

attempt to revitalize the North-South dialogue.

312. As regards co-operation among developing

countries, the recent meeting in Manila showed

the realities and potential of this broad range

of co-oper¬ation and solidarity.

313. I cannot conclude my statement without

saying that my country accepts the existence of

this real and regrettable world political

panorama because it is a matter of plain fact.

However, we also believe in the absolute need to

overcome this grave situation, because we are

sure that the instinct of self-preser¬vation will

compel all the peoples in the world to unite

their efforts to change this picture of real and

potential conflicts. But we also firmly believe

that that primary objective cannot be attained

through vague declarations and pious words, but

only through specific action and a healthy

political determination, which, by establishing

good faith in international relations and

encouraging progress and wealth, will make

possible the emergence of new protagonists on the

world scene. There must be new presences capable

of restor¬ing a balance threatened today by the

magnificent development of some nations at the

expense of the stagnation or the slow development

of others.

314. I should like to conclude my statement by

referring once again to the Malvinas question,

which is so vitally important to my country. The

world knows Argentina's devotion to peace and

that we have lived through more than a century

without any periods of war. If a peaceful people

felt it necessary to take up arms to defend its

cause, in an unequal battle, it was solely as the

result of the justice of that cause. Our forces

consisted entirely of Argentineans who were

fulfilling their patriotic duty. In our struggle

we did not turn to foreigners boastful of their

bloodthirsty ferocity closely tied to the

degrading exchange of money.

315. Our martyrs, sacrificed in the desolate

lands and frigid waters of the South Atlantic,

will be constant witnesses to Argentina's

unwavering sovereignty over the Malvinas, a cause

whose defense brooks neither concessions nor

hesitation. The hours of sacrifice of our

combatants, as well as the blood and the lives

laid down by so many of them, were not in vain.

The cry that went up then and that will lead us

steadfast to our goal will not fade from the

conscience of mankind.