text: Americans. He had co-sponsored the draft resolution with great enthusiasm, and he had proposed his amendments only because changes had occurred in the situation and it would be improper for the Sub-Commission to ignore such serious violations of human rights. He would withdraw his amendment to the operative part. He regretted, however, that he could not withdraw his amendments to the preambles, since they modestly stated a factual situation which had been in the news everywhere. He could not believe that members of the Sub-Commission could not find it in their souls to condemn the practices referred to. If his amendments were rejected with only his own vote in favour, he wanted every non-governmental organization present and all State observers to know that on 30 August 1990 the Sub-Commission had not been able to condemn the violations of international law specified in his two amendments. He therefore insisted that they should be voted on. 102. Mrs. KSENTINI said that she had been about to accept Mr. Eide's proposal, but after listening to Mr. Treat she had changed her mind. Mr. Treat was horrified that diplomats were being deprived of water and electricity, but if the Sub-Commission were to express its concern regarding that point, how could it fail to express its concern regarding the possibility that in future an entire civilian population might be deprived of food? Many non-governmental organizations and Arabs were concerned over what would be the situation of the Arab population if it were to be deprived of food. Thus, in order to balance Mr. Treat's amendments, she would maintain her own amendment. 103. Mr. EIDE said that his amendment had been intended as an alternative to the amendment proposed by Mrs. Ksentini. Consequently, if she maintained her amendment, he would have to maintain his. 
analysis: This text appears to be discussing human rights violations, specifically the deprivation of basic necessities such as water, electricity, and food. The speakers seem to be debating the language of a resolution or report, with a focus on the moral and ethical implications of such actions. The context of the discussion suggests that it is related to international relations and human rights, rather than economic or scientific issues.