47
and, at the same time, I was following the text of the press release circulated by the United States Mission and containing the text of his statement. There were a number of additional paragraphs, additional ideas, which he inserted during his statement. However, there was one phrase which he left out, which is in the press release but was not spoken by Ambassador Pickering. I can understand his reasons for not wanting to pronounce it, and I am grateful to him for having spoken as he did.
The second paragraph on page 2 of the text circulated by the United States Mission contains a reference to 660 (1990), and thereafter it is stated that the Security Council must unequivocally establish today that the family of civilized nations will not tolerate such behaviour, that is, the behaviour of a State which, according to the text of the statement, fails to comply with the Council's decision. After this comes a phrase which disappeared from the statement as spoken by the representative of the United States. It is very short, containing just four words, and I shall quote it: not here, not ever.
That phrase could not be uttered because it highlights that inconsistency and that unacceptable selectivity of approach which the United States adopts with respect to this resolution. The United States really is not in a position to have these principles applied not merely here but also there and everywhere, not merely today but always, without fail. The reasons for this are, I think, more than evident, and there is no need to labour the point.
Because we are convinced that the draft resolution presented here does not really help to settle the conflict and because, moreover, we believe that it is based on an approach which should not be assumed by the international community, one which is motivated not by a desire to restore legality or to safeguard the legitimate rights of the Government of Kuwait but by a desire to foster the
