became independent more than 170 years ago, the islands were part of its territory and were united with it politically, juridically and administratively. They were, however, wrenched from Argentine sovereignty by an act of force followed by administra- tive provisions issued by the British Government and the implantation of settlers, which leads the British Government now to assert that its position is valid. But it has never been recognized as such by the majority of nations of the international com- munity, as has so often been made clear in many resolutions adopted overwhelmingly within the United Nations system. As the representative of Brazil so aptly put it [236&h lneerilzg], no arbitral award, international legal ruling or treaty has conferred legal validity on the occupation, which has lasted for 149 years. 159. It cannot, then, be held that Argentine sov- ereignty has lapsed. Argentine rights and titles are fully as valid today as they were in 1833. Over the past I5 years or more, efforts at peaceful negotiation were exhausted. What followed was an act of lawful recovery of land that had always belonged to Argen- tina. 160. How can that lawful act of recovery by Argen- tina be held to be more serious than the act of force by Britain which is the origin of this colonial problem, a problem which would never have existed if the terri- tory of a nation of the Americas had not been thus dismembered at the beginning of the last century? 161. Colleagues have said that Council resolution 502 (1982) is imperfect. That is true. First of all. it takes a partial approach to the problem, and it does not recognize the origin of the problem, which has, in fact, been recognized in resolutions of the General 14 Assembly on decolonization, in particular resolutions 
**Analysis**
This text appears to be a diplomatic statement or a speech about a territorial dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom. The language used is formal and diplomatic, with references to international law, treaties, and resolutions. The text does not mention economic, social, or environmental issues, but rather focuses on the historical and political context of the conflict.

**Category**
International trade, Politics