text: turning back forthwith, in their own interests, to the nego- tiating track. 122. There is a clear and unmistakable contrast between this policy of negotiation-supported without reservations by my Government-and the policy of certain forces out- side the region which fuel the conflict in the benighted belief that their own interests are served. Why do these distant forces fear peaceful negotiations among the parties involved, unless for self-serving reasons? Theirs is a selfish and. myopic policy. It ieads ineluctably to more bloodlet- ting for the Angolans, more hardship for civilians which have been so long under the yoke of Mars. And it is a devious policy that feigns concern for the interests of the Angolans, that distorts realities to serve its own expansion- ist goals and that, under the guise of disinterest, has a clear mission for the region which does not incorporate the hopes of all for peace, freedom and security. 123. My delegation welcomes this resolution as an occa- sion to reiterate our call for an immediate withdrawal of South African troops from Angola. We join once again all members of the Council in deploring this latest incursion. 124. But, as I stated a little over two weeks ago, my Government believes that the introduction of more weap- ons of war into the area will result in an escalation of violence, more deaths, more misery. Angola needs peace, not more foreign troops, foreign intervention and imported arms. 125. The United States supports the territorial integrity of Angola. We call on South Africa, yet again, to halt further acts of aggression. We could not, however, vote in favour of paragraph 6 for the same reason that we could not vote in favour of a similar call to arms in resolution 571(1985). For that reason my delegation abstained in the 
analysis: The text appears to be a statement made by the United States representative to the United Nations Security Council, discussing the conflict in Angola and the role of South Africa. The language used is political and diplomatic, with a focus on the interests of the parties involved and the potential consequences of different actions. The text does not mention specific economic or social issues, but rather focuses on the political and military aspects of the conflict.