priate manner to the observations put forward by Ambassador Parsons, 193. Further on the Prime Minister says: “It is very difficult to know who you are negotiating with. You negotiate at the United Nations with a Mr. Ros.“‘~ 194. “A Mr. Ros,” Ambassador Ros deserves great respect. He has won our affection and OUI admiration, because he is an institution in the United Nations and in the Movement of Non-Aligned Coun- tries. He is a man deserving of great respect. Yet this is how “civilized” Governments treat others. 1%. The Prime Minister also says: “But, YOU see, we were already negotiating with him back in February.“:‘: In other words, the idea that they had talked with him in February did not make much difference, The11 something more serious is stated, something that I’c:~IIY should give cause for thought, because this disruption. this upheaval, this poisoning of inter- nationaf relations has unwisely been brought to he1 mM important ally, the Government of the United SiilkS. -- 196. She says, in a reply: “President Reagan telephoned President Galticri to say: ‘We hear you are making plans to invade. JJon’t*’ I*:> 197. Where do you see, in relations between free and sovereign peoples, the President of a State, no matter how powerful the State might be. telling another leader: “No! You can’t do this; you have to do what I want you to do”? That is simply abandoning one’s sovereignty. It is humiliating. It is unworthy, There is no word for it. I do not know whether this is the truth or a lie, but the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom has no right to put President Reagan in a position which will cause resentment in Latin Amer- ica. I am not the only one saying this. Today’s issue 