(1) requested the Secretary General to enter into immediate consultations with the parties concerned and interested (i.e., Spain, Morocco, Mauritania, and Algeria) and to report to the Security Council on the results of his consultations, and (2) appealed to all parties to exercise restraint and moderation. When consultations failed to induce Morocco to call off the march, the Council met again on November 2, adopting another resolution by consensus. The second resolution urged all the parties concerned and interested to avoid any unilateral or other action that might further escalate the tension in the area, and requested the Secretary General to continue and intensify his consultations and to report to the Council as soon as possible in order to enable the Council to adopt any further measures that might be necessary. Speaking for the United States on November 2, Ambassador Bennett said: My government supports fully the terms of the resolution that we have just adopted by consensus and we encourage the Secretary General to continue his vigorous efforts with the concerned and interested parties. We hope a solution can be found that recognizes the views of the parties in accordance with all of the General Assembly and Security Council resolutions that have a bearing on the means by which a dependent area achieves the goal of self-determination. "We also call on all of the parties involved to avoid any action that could turn this important area of the world into a scene of confrontation and possible human tragedy. The ties that link the peoples of the region should make all equally aware of the necessity of finding a peaceful and mutually acceptable solution." On November 6, the "Green March"11/ started with 350,000 Moroccan civilians moving into the Sahara, then halting and camping before a line composed of Spanish forces inside the Sahara consolidated 12 kilometers from the Moroccan border. Consultations continued and on November 9 King Hassan asked the participants in the "Green March" to return to Morocco. On November 12 negotiations opened 11/ The color green is the color of the Prophet Mohammad. With its religious connotation in the Islamic faith, it emphasized the basis in Islamic law of the Moroccan legal claim to the Sahara and also suggested to the Moroccan marchers and other Islamic observers elements of a religious crusade against the Spanish administration. in Madrid among Spain, Morocco, and Mauritania, and on November 14 the three parties announced their agreement on a set of principles to govern the future of the Sahara. The main principle was that Spain undertook to withdraw from the Sahara by February 28, 1976, and in the interim Morocco and Mauritania would participate with Spain in a tripartite administration. Algeria informed the Secretary General that it considered that the tripartite declaration was contrary to the relevant Security Council resolutions and therefore null and void. GENERAL ASSEMBLY Soon after the Madrid agreement, the Fourth Committee of the 30th General Assembly began its consideration of Spanish Sahara. The Committee's consideration lasted from December 1 to 4 and resulted in the adoption of two competing resolutions. On December 2 Tanzania and the Malagasy Republic introduced a draft resolution which was eventually sponsored by 27 states. In its operative paragraphs the resolution, inter alia, (1) reaffirmed the inalienable right of the people of Spanish Sahara to selfdetermination; (2) reaffirmed the responsibility of the administering power and of the United Nations with regard to the decolonization of the territory; (3) requested the Spanish Government, as the administering power, to take immediately all necessary measures, in consultation with all the parties concerned and interested, so that all Saharans originating in the territory might exercise fully and freely, under UN supervision, their inalienable right to self-determination; (4) requested the Secretary General to make the necessary arrangements for the supervision of the act of self-determination referred to above; and (5) urged all the parties concerned and interested to exercise restraint and to desist from unilateral or other action outside the decisions of the General Assembly on the territory. It made no mention of the Madrid agreement. The resolution was approved by the Committee on December 4 by a rollcall vote of 84 (Algeria) to 3, with 42 abstentions (Spain, U.S.), and adopted by the plenary Assembly on December 10 by a rollcall vote of • 88 (Algeria) to 0, with 41 abstentions (Spain, U.S.). Morocco and Mauritania did not participate in either vote. The second draft resolution, introduced by Senegal on December 3, was sponsored by eight states. In its operative paragraphs the resolution (1) took note of the tripartite agreement concluded at Madrid on November 14 by the Governments of Mauritania, Morocco, and Spain; (2) reaffirmed the inalienable right to selfdetermination of all the Saharan populations originating in the territory; (3) requested the parties to the On December 4, at the request of Benin--a cosponsor of the 27-power draft resolution--the Committee took separate votes on operative paragraph 2 and on operative paragraphs 1, 3, and 4. Paragraph 2 was adopted without objection. Paragraphs 1, 3, and 4 were adopted by a rollcall vote of 46 (Mauritania, Morocco, Spain, U.S.) to 37 (Algeria), with 49 abstentions. The resolution as a whole was then approved by a rollcall vote of 48 (Mauritania, Morocco, Spain, U.S.) to 32 (Algeria), with 52 abstentions, and adopted by the plenary Assembly on December 10 by a rollcall vote of 56 (Mauritania, Morocco, Spain, U.S.) to 42 (Algeria), with 34 abstentions. The United States abstained on the 27-power resolution and voted for the eight-power resolution because it supported the terms of the Madrid agreement, which it believed then offered the best chance for a peaceful negotiated settlement. BELIZE The Fourth Committee discussed the question of Belize (British Honduras) along with a number of other small territories during its consideration of the agenda item "Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples" (see p. 307). Committee action focused on the contending positions of Guatemala, which has territorial claims on Belize, and the United Kingdom, which is the administering power in Belize. On November 7 Guatemala and 12 other Latin American states submitted a draft resolution, which in its final form took note in a preambular paragraph of the existence of a dispute between the governments of Guatemala and the United Kingdom concerning sovereignty over Belize, and in its operative portion (1) invited the two governments to continue their negotiations without delay to find a peaceful solution to the problem, duly taking into account the provisions and objectives of the UN Charter, the 1960 Declaration on Colonialism, and the interests of the people of Belize; and (2) 77-838 76-21 requested the two governments to inform the Committee of 24 and the Assembly at its next session of progress achieved in the negotiations. A second draft resolution, sponsored by the United Kingdom and 61 other states, was submitted the same day. This resolution, inter alia, (1) reaffirmed the inalienable right of the people of Belize to selfdetermination and independence; (2) declared that the inviolability and territorial integrity of Belize must be preserved; (3) called upon the United Kingdom as administering power, acting in close consultation with the Government of Belize, and upon Guatemala to pursue urgently their negotiations for the earliest possible resolution of their differences concerning the future of Belize; and (4) declared that any proposals for the resolution of these differences that may emerge from the negotiations must be in accordance with the first two paragraphs of the draft resolution (listed above). A third draft resolution was submitted on November 10 by Mauritius and cosponsored by Benin. It expressed deep concern at the recent military movements of the Guatemalan armed forces in the area near the Belizean border and called upon the Government of Guatemala to desist from all actions that might threaten the territorial integrity and national unity of Belize. Yet a fourth draft resolution was introduced by Mexico on November 11. Intended as a compromise text, the Mexican draft in preambular paragraphs noted the existence of a controversy between Guatemala and the United Kingdom concerning the future of Belize and reaffirmed that any solution to the controversy must be found exclusively by peaceful means. In its principal operative paragraph it invited Guatemala and the United Kingdom to resume without delay their negotiations with a view to finding a peaceful solution to the problem. On November 21 Guatemala submitted a motion under rule 121 of the General Assembly's rules of procedure calling for a decision on the competence of the Fourth Committee to adopt the proposals contained in the U.K.cosponsored draft. The motion was rejected by a recorded vote of 11 in favor to 108 opposed, with 8 abstentions (U.S.). The Committee then rejected the Guatemalan- cosponsored draft resolution by a rollcall vote of 22 to 62, with 41 abstentions (U.S.) The U.K.- cosponsored draft was approved by a recorded vote of 103 to 12, with 13 abstentions (U.S.). This resolution was subsequently adopted by the General Assembly on December 8 by a rollcall vote of 110 to 9, with 16 abstentions (U.S.). Both Mauritius and Mexico withdrew their draft resolutions. The United States abstained on all votes on the Belize issue because of its concern for the views of both Guatemala and the United Kingdom, two of its traditionally close friends, as well as for the interests of the people of Belize. The United States has supported a negotiated solution to the problem of Belize and has sought to encourage both parties to find such a solution through peaceful means. OTHER TERRITORIES OTHER QUESTIONS Under the agenda item "Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples" the Fourth Committee, at 23 meetings between November 7 and December 5, considered together the chapters of the Committee of 24's report relating to specific territories not covered by other agenda items (i.e., Namibia, Southern Rhodesia, Portuguese territories). In addition to the resolutions on U.S. territories, Spanish Sahara, and Belize (described in previous sections of this report), the Committee approved nine resolutions on (1) Brunei; (2) Montserrat; (3) Gilbert Islands; (4) Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, and Turks and Caicos Islands; (5) Tokelau Islands; (6) Seychelles; (7) Solomon Islands; (8) New Hebrides, Pitcairn, and Tuvalu;12/ and (9) the French Territory of the Afars and Issas.13/ The Assembly also adopted consensus statements on the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, St. Helena, and Gibraltar, and decided to postpone until the 31st Assembly consideration of the Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas) and of Antigua, Dominica, St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent. A draft resolution on Brunei, which is situated on the northern coast of the island of Borneo and comprises two enclaves in eastern Malaysia, was introduced on November 13 by Malaysia and eventually sponsored by 20 states. It reaffirmed the right of the people of Brunei to self-determination and called upon the United Kingdom as administering power to take all steps within its competence to facilitate expeditiously 12/ As a result of the referendum held in the Gilbert and Ellice Islands in August and September 1974, which had been observed by a UN visiting mission to the territory, the Ellice Islands separated from the Territory of the Gilbert and Ellice Islands on Oct. 1, 1975, and became known as Tuvalu. 13/ French Somaliland, or Djibouti. |