resolution 502 (1982), but also made it impossible for Argentina to begin to implement that resolution with respect to the withdrawal of its troops. How can such far-reaching duplicity be explained? How could that country’s proclaimed desire “to resume the path of peaceful . . . settlement of our differences” be reconciled with the preparations for war which its Government was making at that very moment with the help of war material supplied by the greatest Western military Power? 46. And, on the contrary, what advantage could there be for Argentina in maintaining its forces in operations in the Malvinas? What threat did Argentine territorial integrity constitute for the United Kingdom, 14,000 kilometers from its coasts? 47. Had the British negotiated in good faith during those 17 long years, had they facilitated negotiations, as requested by resolution 502 (1982), instead of embarking on a war which obliged us to defend our rights and made it impossible for us to withdraw out troops in the absence of genuine negotiation and of British willingness to negotiate, then today we would be enjoying peace. 48. While the British fleet was advancing and being strengthened under the cover of initial negotiations in which the only party interested in a definitive solu- tion to the long dispute was Argentina, the British were arrogating to themselves the function of international policing without, of course, the existence of any such mandate from the Council. 49. Together with the announcement of the dis- patch of the colonial fleet, the United Kingdom de- cided on the adoption of measures clearly constituting aggression. On IO April it was announced in London that, as of 12 April, a blockade zone would be crcuted around the Malvinas. 50. Successive British naval and air attacks against Argentina in the region of the Malvinas, South Geor- 
**Analysis**
The text appears to be a political speech or statement, criticizing the actions of the United Kingdom and Argentina in the context of the Falklands War. The language used is formal and diplomatic, and the author seems to be analyzing the events leading up to the war, questioning the motivations and actions of the parties involved. The text does not contain any specific references to economic development, natural resources, or other fields related to the categories provided.

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