text: attacks against their neighbours; a recent example was the use of Namibia by South Africa as a base for launching attacks against Angola. The United States had followed a similar course in South-East Asia when it had attacked neighbouring Indo-Chinese countries. His delegation would accordingly have preferred the elimination of the words "to continue" in paragraph 2 of the draft decision. 91. Mr. BROWNE (New Zealand) said that New Zealand had supported the draft resolution but nevertheless could not accept the claim that foreign economic interests were necessarily detrimental to the people of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Nor did New Zealand accept the indiscriminate criticism of. adntinistering Powers. His delegation also had legal reservations about some of the provisions of the draft resolution. None of those concerns however implied any weakening of New Zealand's total opposition to the unacceptable exploitation of Namibia's maritime and mineral resources or to the policies of the Government of South Africa in that Territory. His delegation regretted that the text did not adequately distinguish between those practices and the situation in other colonial Territories. In that connection he wished to place on record that, as the report of the Committee of 24 would confirm, there was no element in any part of the draft resolution that had any application of relevance to New Zealand's administration of Tokelau. 92. New Zealand had abstained on the draft decision on military activities and had objected on procedural grounds whenever texts on that subject had been introduced in the Committee. His delegation agreed with the observations in the draft decision in so far as they related to military activities which were demonstrably impeding implementation of the right to self-determination, particularly in Namibia. But it did not accept the implication in other paragraphs that military 
analysis: The text discusses the exploitation of natural resources and the impact of military activities on the self-determination of a territory, specifically Namibia. It also touches on the distinction between the situation in Namibia and other colonial territories. The language used is formal and diplomatic, suggesting a discussion of international relations and governance.