Fourth Committee, 10th plenary meeting - General Assembly, 81st session

1. Item 52

   Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories transmitted under Article 73 e of the Charter of the United Nations

2. Item 53

   Economic and other activities which affect the interests of the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories

3. Item 54

   Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples by the specialized agencies and the international institutions associated with the United Nations

🇬🇧 United Kingdom, 🇰🇼 Kuwait, 🇮🇷 Islamic Republic of Iran

1. Round 1
   🇬🇧 United KingdomFirst replyin response to Argentina, Georgia▶ 38:20 · 2 min

   Thank you, Chair. I would like to exercise the right of reply in response to the explanation of vote of the distinguished representative of Argentina. The United Kingdom has no doubt about its sovereignty over the Falklands Islands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and surrounding maritime areas of both territories. The United Kingdom is steadfast in its support for the Falkland Islanders' rights of self determination, which is enshrined in the UN Charter and Article I of the two UN Covenants on Human Rights. The Falklanders have as much right as any other peoples to determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development. The Falkland Islands has a diverse and growing population of over 60 nationalities, an active and proud democratic community, and a healthy economy. The Islanders have made clear their overwhelming wish for the Falklands to remain a self governing territory of the United Kingdom, including in the 2013 referendum supervised by independent observers. I reemphasise therefore that there can be no dialogue on sovereignty unless the Falklanders so wish. On the point around hydrocarbon activities, as I've just set out, the people of the Falkland Islands have freely and democratically chosen their future. They have every right to develop and manage their natural resources without intimidation, coercion, or interference from others. This is a legitimate commercial venture working to some of the most stringent standards internationally, regulated under Falklands Islands law and conducted in full accordance with international law, including UNCLOS. Efforts to obstruct such lawful economic activity are not acts of responsible international agreement. They are deliberate attempts to undermine the prosperity and economic security of a self governing people. To conclude, the United Kingdom will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Falklands government and the people of the Falkland Islands. We will robustly defend their wishes, their economy, and their right to determine their own future.

   Read in full
2. Round 2
   🇰🇼 KuwaitFirst replyin response to Islamic Republic of Iran▶ 1:22:14 · 5 min

   Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, distinguished delegates, I take the floor to exercise my delegation's right of reply to the statements made by the representative of Iran. I listened carefully to both interventions during this these agenda items. And I believe the Iranian representative has left this committee with some serious questions that deserve clear answers. Let me begin with his own words. And he stated, and I quote, our actions have been directed solely at military sites used in connection with attacks against our people and civilian infrastructure. End of quote. Mr Chair, I have three simple questions. Is Kuwait International Airport a military installation? Is Kuwait International public institution for security, uh social security a military target? Are our power Generation plants, water desalination facilities, and civilian oil refineries, military installations. These are among the civilian facilities struck during the attacks against my country. These are documented incidents, not hypothetical examples, and they stand in direct contradiction to the Iranian representative's claim that his country's operations were directed exclusively against military sites. The facts do not disappear simply because the Iranian delegation chooses to deny them. Mr. Chair, the representative of Iran also invoked Article 51 of the United Nations Charter to justify his country's actions towards mine. Let me state Kuwait's position with absolute clarity. Kuwait has not participated in military aggression against Iran. Kuwait has not permitted its territory to be used to launch attacks against Iran, and Kuwait categorically rejects any allegation suggesting otherwise. The Iranian representative claimed to possess what he described as, and I quote, multiple pieces of conclusive evidence. If such evidence exists, let him present it. An accusation is not evidence. And an accusation repeated from this podium does not become proof. Article 51 is not a blank check to attack neighboring states or disregard the protection of civilians. A state cannot invoke the United Nations Charter to justify violating it. Mr. Chair, the Iranian representative, also declared, and I quote, no state's territory or facilities should be used to enable attacks against another. End of quote. On that principle, the state of Kuwait agrees. But principles must apply equally to everyone. How does Iran reconcile that statement with attacks carried out against Kuwait by armed groups and militias affiliated with Iran? Iran cannot demand respect for its own sovereignty while disregarding the sovereignty of its neighbors. And interference does not become acceptable simply because it is conducted through armed proxies rather than conventional forces. Mr. Chair, I'll end with this, and I'm pretty sure I'll come later as well. Kuwait has consistently chosen dialogue and diplomacy, but our commitment to peace must never be mistaken for weakness. Our restraint is not acquiescence, and our preference for diplomacy is not permission to violate our sovereignty. Kuwait extended the hand of friendship. That hand should never been met with attacks. Kuwait seeks peace, but Kuwait will never compromise on its sovereignty, its security, or the safety of its people. And thank you, Mr. Chair.

   Read in full
3. 🇮🇷 Islamic Republic of IranFirst replyin response to Kuwait▶ 1:27:01 · 3 min

   Thank you. Uh Mr. Chair for giving me the floor. Actually, we requested for point of order, but uh it is disappointing that uh our uh point of order didn't respond. Actually, as the general debate is over, uh and or we see just a write-off reply to uh what is expressed during the general debates as a as an explanation of vote. Actually I think that it's against uh the rules of procedure of the room. But in response to the delegation of Kuwait. Excuse me. And allegations. Uh I would like You are still under the item. You can make your your your explanation of vote. Did that that's the right of reply? Yes. Yes, please. narrative of regional development fails to establish its relevance to these agenda items uh for this committee while disregarding the unlawful aggression against our people, particularly since February twenty-eighth. That brutal aggression, uh, which was omitted from uh Kuwait statement provided the basis for Iran's defensive measures taken in accordance with international law and in exercise of its inherent right of self defense under Article fifty first of the Charter. My country's defensive actions were not directed against the peoples of sovereignty of neighboring states. They responded to attacks conducted from military bases used by the aggressors in those countries. Documented evidence supports our position. A fundamental point cannot be obstrued by political rhetoric. Sovereignty cannot be in work to disclaim responsibility for allowing treacher placed at another state's disposal to be used for aggression against the third state. Such conduct cannot simply be characterized as neutrality and should be condemned strongly. Masacher colonialism cannot be treated solely as a chapter of the past. In our view, the continued military presence of forces that have attacked our country reflects contemporary patterns of domination in our region. States hosting those forces, including Kuwait, Should explain how their military partnership accord with the principles they invoke here, including opposition to foreign domination and unlawful occupation. Regarding state of foremost, Iran has for decades upheld freedom of navigation and maritime safety and security. That commitment remains unchanged. Current conditions cannot be assessed independently of the aggression against our country or the use of maritime routes to conduct attacks and support the military facilities supporting them. Iran's position concerning the passage regime remains unchanged and consistent with applicable consumer international law. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

   Read in full
4. 🇰🇼 KuwaitSecond reply▶ 1:30:15 · 3 min

   Thank you, Mr. Chair. I take the floor a second time to exercise my right of reply and advise to everyone in this room to review the rules of procedure before making uh claims in the room. I'd like to remind Mr. Chair. The Security Council has spoken through Resolution 2817 of 2026. And let me remind the Iranian representative of one particular significant fact. A record number of 136 member states co sponsored that resolution. That represents more than 70% of the entire membership of the United Nations. 136 countries, ladies and gentlemen. That means more than seven out of every ten members. The resolution condemned Iran's attacks against Kuwait and other states in the region. The targeting of civilian objects and the threats to international navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. This is not merely Kuwait's position, nor is it simply a regional position. It reflects the collective position of an overwhelming majority of the international community. The Iranian delegation may disagree with that position, but it cannot rewrite the record of the Security Council. And Mr. Chair, regarding the Iranian delegation's use and their attempt to dictate geographical terminology used by other delegations, Kuwait will continue to use terminology consistent with the facts on the ground. The editorial practice of the United Nations Secretariat do not grant any member state the authority to dictate the terminology of another sovereign state. The urgent question is not what Iran wishes the others to call the Gulf. It is whether Iran respects the sovereignty of its neighbors and freedom of navigations through its waters. And one last thing, Mr. Chair, I'd like to remind the Iranian representative I posed three questions and I did not get an answer to any of them. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah.

   Read in full
5. 🇮🇷 Islamic Republic of IranSecond reply▶ 1:33:01 · 3 min

   Thank you, Mr. Chair, for giving me the floor. Once again, actually, my delegation would like to categorically reject all allegations against my country. And uh Actually, it's not clear for our delegation still what's the relevance of these uh allegations to the work of this committee that this is the question that I asked and is not responded yet. Uh I take the floor once more following Kuwait representative further intervention, which leaves the central question unanswered. How much disclaim concerning the work of this uh committee? Uh Kuwait or any other delegation cannot assess our defensive response while disregarding the aggression against our people and the arrangements that enable that heinous aggressions. We distinguished our neighbors from the forces responsible, but sovereignty does not absolve a state of responsibility for conduct facilitating aggression. Iran's commitment to maritime safety continues. Conditions in a Strait of Hormos must be considered in light of the aggressions and the military use of maritime space against our country. My delegation's position. Uh also regarding the resolution 2817 is already set out in the relevant communications including document S Stroke 2026 389 and S Stroke 2026 Stroke 202, to which we uh refer uh uh delegation of Kuwait. We will not take further committee time repeating them. Actually my delegation would like once again to reiterate its strong position regarding uh the condemnation of all attacks against our country and also those actions that facilitated those aggressions against our people, mostly uh women and children including one hundred and sixty-eight uh school children that uh killed in one strike in to to uh to an elementary school. And um I would like again reiterate, Mr. Chair, please. Um all delegations should refrain from any any to drag any discussion that is not relevant to the work of this committee, to the discussion of this committee. Thank you.

   Read in full
6. Round 3
   🇮🇷 Islamic Republic of IranFirst reply▶ 2:26:20 · 2 min

   Thank you, Mr. Chair. I rise to a point of order under Rule 113 concerning a procedural. Irregularity that just took place moment ago when a deg delegation misused the floor that was granted for the explanation of vote to exercise of a right of reply to what passed during the debate. The Islamic Republic of Iran formally objects to that action. As in accordance with Rule 115, only during the course of a debate in a main committee, the Chair may accord the right of reply to any member if a speech delivered after he was declared the the list closed makes this desirable. Furthermore, as as established under Rule 128, once the chairman has announced the beginning of voting, no representative shall interrupt the voting except on a point of order connected strictly to the actual conduct of the voting. A right of reply does not fall within these parameters and is legally impermissible during this phase. Taking the floor for a right of reply at that juncture bypass established protections and disrupt the voting process. We request that the distinguished representative of the secretariat clarify the application of Rule 128 regarding interruptions during voting and how the integrity of our voting procedures was maintained in this instance. Finally, Mr. Chair, we request that this formal objection, the Secretariat's clarification, and the Chair's ruling on this matter be fully and explicitly recorded in the official records and reflected in the final report of this committee to the General Assembly. I thank you. Yeah.

   Read in full

Verbatim from the transcript. A reply is identified from its own words, the Chair's grant, or its place in the right-of-reply sequence; delegations and addressees follow the transcript's attribution.