text: of the international community. Not satisfied with its declaration. Great Britain proceeded to violate its own provisions by sinking the crLIiser(;(JncJ/.~// Rr/,qr~r~~r~ outside the 200-mile area. 66. Fifthly, the United Kingdom has established another IOO-mile zone around Ascension Island, which constitutes a serious threat to civil aviation of States outside the conflict. 67. Sixthly, to confirm once and for all the false- hood of the claim of self-defence made by the United Kingdom, that country proceeded to decree a 12-mile blockade off the coast of continental Argentina, 68. The United Kingdom is seeking to justify all its breaches of resolution 502 ( 1982). which it presented itself, by invoking the right of self-defence as enshrined in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. However, that Article only endorses such a right until the Security Council has taken the necessary meas- ures to maintain international peace and security. 69. Accordingly, since the Council had adopted resolution SO2 (1982). the United Kingdom could not. without gravely violating the Charter and the resolu- tion of the Council, engage in all the hostile acts to which we have referred. 70. As has been said. one cannot invoke self-defence in this case as that would only apply, following the adoption of a resolution by the Council. if the state of hostilities continued without interruption. which clearly has not happened. On the contrary. the United Kingdom’s actions led to a new opening of hostilities. 71. There is no rule of international law that justi- fits the United Kingdom’s armed action which hi!5 brought war to the American continent. No Provl- sion of the Charter can bc used to justify this irrationill conduct. 72. From tho very moment that the United Kingdom dccidcd to resort to the Security Council for the adL)P 
analysis: The text appears to be a diplomatic statement or a report addressing a specific international conflict, focusing on the actions of the United Kingdom and their implications on international law and relations. The language used is formal and technical, indicating a context of international politics and diplomacy. The text does not mention any specific economic, social, or cultural issues, but rather emphasizes the violation of international law and the consequences of such actions.