CENPA-125~05 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 5 of 19 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Loading content ...
3. "4# Calls upon all States, and in particular the mil- itary allies of Portugal within the framework of NATO, to refrain from supplying that country with arms and munitions and all other forms of assistance so long as the Portuguese Government fails to renounce its policy of colonial domination. ..." The most important aspects of this resolution are the following; a. It makes our struggle legitimate. The legitimacy of our armed struggle for liberation is now recognized by this world organisation. b. Consequently, all the moral and material support that other countries and organisations give to us will now have a legal as well as a moral basis. c. The imperialist policies of NATO, represented in this concrete case by the support that that organisation gives to Portuguese colonialism, is condemned by the United Nations* although . indirectly * through an appeal. V/e could not expect more from the United Nations. As a matter—« of fact, it was not without opposition that that" rftgoJutioyy jp^g approved: the United States and Great Britain voted against it; -XtLQJOl*- Jo**ti*QJ4&-~ajm& abstained. ,It is important to stress this point: by voting against, the United States and firltflin clQPirly affirm that they do not condemn ixhe no] mod aJ j a%-t>^iiQv of "PeaHRogalr on the contrary, they support it. They do not recognise the right of the peoples of the Portuguese colonies to independence. We appreciate this clearly defined, attitude. It allows us to establish without frewLtcution the basis of our relations with these countries in the present aqcj for the future. Italy, Australia and Denmark abstained. What is the meaning of an abstention in a vote such as this one? The meaning can only be this: those countries oppose the resolution, but have not the moral courage to declare it publicly. V/e have no doubts about this. Australia, for example, already has sent more than 1,000 coldiers to South Vietnam to fight at the side of the American invaders against the people of that country. Italy and Denmark, by voting against the resolution, are behaving in accordance w^th the principles of the imperialist and pro-colonialist alliance they belong to, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. One fact must be noted: after the vote, the delegate of one of these countries told us that he and his delegation personally supported our struggle absolutely, that after hearing the proofs we had presented, they were convinced that in fact the armed struggle is the only way we can oppose Portuguese colonialism,
Object Description
Description
Title | CENPA-125~05 |
Filename | CENPA-125~05.tiff |
Full text | 3. "4# Calls upon all States, and in particular the mil- itary allies of Portugal within the framework of NATO, to refrain from supplying that country with arms and munitions and all other forms of assistance so long as the Portuguese Government fails to renounce its policy of colonial domination. ..." The most important aspects of this resolution are the following; a. It makes our struggle legitimate. The legitimacy of our armed struggle for liberation is now recognized by this world organisation. b. Consequently, all the moral and material support that other countries and organisations give to us will now have a legal as well as a moral basis. c. The imperialist policies of NATO, represented in this concrete case by the support that that organisation gives to Portuguese colonialism, is condemned by the United Nations* although . indirectly * through an appeal. V/e could not expect more from the United Nations. As a matter—« of fact, it was not without opposition that that" rftgoJutioyy jp^g approved: the United States and Great Britain voted against it; -XtLQJOl*- Jo**ti*QJ4&-~ajm& abstained. ,It is important to stress this point: by voting against, the United States and firltflin clQPirly affirm that they do not condemn ixhe no] mod aJ j a%-t>^iiQv of "PeaHRogalr on the contrary, they support it. They do not recognise the right of the peoples of the Portuguese colonies to independence. We appreciate this clearly defined, attitude. It allows us to establish without frewLtcution the basis of our relations with these countries in the present aqcj for the future. Italy, Australia and Denmark abstained. What is the meaning of an abstention in a vote such as this one? The meaning can only be this: those countries oppose the resolution, but have not the moral courage to declare it publicly. V/e have no doubts about this. Australia, for example, already has sent more than 1,000 coldiers to South Vietnam to fight at the side of the American invaders against the people of that country. Italy and Denmark, by voting against the resolution, are behaving in accordance w^th the principles of the imperialist and pro-colonialist alliance they belong to, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. One fact must be noted: after the vote, the delegate of one of these countries told us that he and his delegation personally supported our struggle absolutely, that after hearing the proofs we had presented, they were convinced that in fact the armed struggle is the only way we can oppose Portuguese colonialism, |
Archival file | Volume9/CENPA-125~05.tiff |