military activities. There would appear to be a procedural irregularity in including a resolution on military activities under the item. The resolution also ! contained misleading and exaggerated language with which his delegation did not wish to be associated; it also contained unsubstantiated criticisms of individual countries. 79. Mr. DELFOSSE (Belgium) said that his delegation had voted against the draft resolution on the activities of foreign interests as it had serious reservations on several paragraphs which referred indiscriminately to Namibia as well as to the very different situations existing in other Non-Self-Governing Territories. The text was unbalanced in that it avoided any reference to the satisfactory evolution of many of those Territories and systematically censured foreign investments as being prejudicial to the interests of the population. The issue had been addressed in an inappropriate ideological context. His delegation repudiated such an approach and regretted that the objections previously expressed by his own and other delegations had not been taken into account. 80. His delegation nevertheless wished to reiterate its unequivocal support for the many resolutions adopted by the General Assembly designed to end the illegal occupation ot Namibia and the apartheid policy of south Africa which not only had a serious impact on the two countries mentioned but had destabilizing etfects on the development of all the countries of southern Africa. / ... A/C.4/40/SR.l0 English Page 17 81. Mr. INFANTE (Chile) said that his delegation had voted in favour of the draft resolution. That did not, however, mean that it supported the concept that all foreign economic interests represented an obstacle to the implementation of resolution 1514 (XV). 82. His delegation would also have preferred that the COmmittee should have followed the same procedure as the General Assembly and avoided specific refer•nces to individual States. 
**Analysis**
The text appears to be a discussion about a resolution related to foreign economic interests and their impact on the development of certain territories, specifically Namibia. The speakers express concerns about the language used in the resolution, which they find misleading and exaggerated, and also criticize the resolution for not considering the different situations in other Non-Self-Governing Territories. The topic seems to be more related to the political and economic context of these territories rather than a specific sector like agriculture or industry.

**Category**
International trade, Humanitarian aid and relief