text: in passing of some of the remarks made by the repre- sentative of the United Kingdom. He used the word “procrastination” because during the last two months we have been unable to reach an under- standing, despite the enormous efforts and flexibility of the Argentine position. I wonder how the Govern- ment that he represehts can use that word when fol 17 years it ignored the resolutions adopted by the General Assembly in 1965, 1973 and 1976. 133. He used the word “principles”. The use of the word “principles” generally has a certain polit- ical and propaganda value, but for that there must be a sufficiently clear basis so that those who hear the word can know that those principles have always guided the political behaviour of the Government of the United Kingdom. I need only recall the example of the island of Diego Garcia, and I seriously wonder whether those principles apply only when it is a ques- tion of a handful of Anglo-Saxons and are ignored when the people involved are of other races or other ethnic origins. 134. The word “extravagant” has been used to refer to some parts of my statement. The extravagance is found in the statements formulated in London. It is precisely in London, at the highest levels of the British Government, that there is talk of a Camp David- type solution, of an Ascension Island-type model. That is where the destiny of those territories is handled, as if we were back in the nineteenth century. 135. I have just been brought some extracts from an interview given by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom to the London television company ATV. One need only read them to realize that the United Kingdom is reiterating the importance of a Sinai-type multilateral force with the United States and other 
analysis: The text appears to be a speech or statement made by an Argentine representative, criticizing the position of the United Kingdom in a territorial dispute. The language used is formal and diplomatic, with the speaker pointing out perceived inconsistencies and hypocrisy in the UK's stance. The focus is on the political and diplomatic aspects of the issue, rather than on economic or social matters.