text: with lrave1 to Cuba, where names were taken and lists made of persons r"ho had traveLled to cuba and, in short, a series of coercive measures imposed which culminated in the closure of the agency.A/40/596 Engl i sh Page 38 85. In June 1984, lhe repressive economic and Cuba .Suprene Court of the United pol i ti.cal measures ioposedStatea reconfirned the on tourlsts rrlshl.ng to travel to 85. The policies of pressure and blacknall used by the United States agalnst Cubaover the past 26 years are violations of the internatlonal principles and agreements wtich safeguard natlonal soverelgnty and the right of peoples to sel f-determina tion. These policies, almed at cutting off Cubars externalrelations, blocklng econooic relatlons of aII kinds wlth the United States andthlrd countries, and bringing about the countryrs isolation in the international economic field, violate the principles of ineernatlonal lau and the Charter of the United Nations and constltute a permanent threat to other countriea. 87. The legislation of the Unlted Statee corroborates these cbarges. On 7 October 1964, the fiickenlooper Anendment vras adopted, wbich aoended the 1964 Foreign Assistance Act (Public tEr, 88-633) and provided that any United Stategcourt should refuae to lssue rurings based on the principles of international lawof the lrell-known act of Seate doctrine, ln the caae of claims made by States tdhich had thenselves taken action to recover their economic interests after 1 January 1959. Thi6 oeasure. rhi.ch had of course been taken ln connection with the sovereign decision of the Cuban people to recover their natlonal lrealth, had noeffect against Cuba, as the United States Department of State argued in opposingthe amendment. Horrever, senator Hickenlooper streased in its defence urat lt uould have world-wide application and n6s vitally ioportant for the protection of UnitedStates investoenls in countries other than Cub€.
analysis: The text appears to be discussing the economic and political relations between the United States and Cuba, highlighting the coercive measures imposed by the US government and the violation of international principles and agreements. The language used suggests a focus on the international relations and economic policies between the two countries, rather than any specific economic development, natural resources, or environmental issues.