text: Republic’s sovereignty over those islands, which are a legitimate part of its tert-itory. and rejection of the use of force as a way of seeking a solution to inter- national disputes. We reiterate both of those points. 155. We regret to have to make further remarks now condemning the ominous course of warlike events which have worsened the situation, damaging the prospects for a peaceful negotiated solution. 1.56. On 3 April, resolution 502 (1982) was adopted; it called for a cessation of hostilities and a withdrawal uf Argentine forces and urged the Governments to seek a diplomatic solution to their differences. Insisting solely on the withdrawal of the Argentine forces, but contravening the primary provision which demanded a cessation of hostilities, and thereby closing the path of negotiations, the Government of the United King- dom announced that a powerful fleet-which included two aircraft carriers and the most modern and sophis- ticated weaponry-would immediately set sail to recapture the Malvinas Islands. The attack was carried out through the occupation of South Georgia Island, the bombardment of the main airport of the islands and many other warlike actions. The Rritish navy-which in other circumstances took part honour- ably, in those same South Atlantic waters, in military engagements which contributed to the salvation of the world from the threat of fascism-sailed this time nearly from one pole to the other to keep a less glorious engagement: to attack with n nuclear submarine and sink an Argentine vessel which was located outside the 200-mile zone of exclusion proclaimed by the London Government itself. 157. The sinking of that vessel, which was not engaged in a military action. caused the loss of hun- dreds of Argentine lives in the waters of the South Atlantic, not far from Amet-ican soil, but many thou- 
analysis: The text appears to be a formal statement or declaration regarding a conflict between two countries, specifically the United Kingdom and Argentina, over the sovereignty of the Malvinas Islands. The language used is formal and diplomatic, with a focus on international relations and the use of force. The text does not mention any economic, social, or cultural issues related to the conflict, and instead focuses on the political and military aspects of the situation.