text: 102. It was our hope that the present resolution would reflect the important step taken in that direction rather 10 than create further legal obstacles to the extension of the UNFICYP mandate. We hope that next time we will no longer have to confront such an untenable situation and that a solution will no longer depend on the good will of the Turkish side alone. In this connection I should like to draw the Council’s attention to the fact that since December 1983 the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and Turkey have not accepted the resolutions on UNFICYP. It will be recalled that on 13 December 1974 [181&h meeting], in response to a question raised by the representative of Turkey, the Secretary-General described the Turkish Cypriot side and Turkey as two parties directly concerned with this problem. 103. Nevertheless, in order to accede to the wishes of the Secretary-General, who in his reports considered that maintenance of the peace-keeping force on the island remained essential to create the conditions most favourable for the search for a settlement to the prob- lem, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus con- tinued to go along with the presence ofaforce entrusted with keeping the peace on the island and continued to co-operate with it. That co-operation is based solely on decisions taken by the Government of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Turkey quite naturally supported that position. In other words, two of the parties directly concerned have for exactly one year not given their agreement to relevant Security Council resolutions because of the context in which they were adopted. However, the two parties in question have so far demonstrated their good will and have shown suf- ficient indulgence to permit UNFICYP to continue its activities. 104. Today, they are agreeing to maintain that posi- 
analysis: The text appears to be discussing a diplomatic and political issue related to the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) and its mandate extension. The language used is formal and official, suggesting a high-level political or diplomatic document. The text mentions specific dates, resolutions, and parties involved, which further supports the notion that it is a political or diplomatic text.