Posted by Rafael Antonio Cabrero/India on March 25, 1997 at 19:12:38:
In Reply to: proposed amendment to UNOL-r1 posted by Reginald Beltran/philippines on March 22, 1997 at 19:27:43:
My esteemed colleague's resolutions go a long way towards easing India's concerns regarding Resolutioopn UNOL-R1. The amendment proposed by the right honorable gentleman from the Philippines is concurrent with India's position and my government thanks the Philippines for taking this wise step.
Yet India would like to suggest a second amendement. Due to the fact that the Recognition of claims in Operative Clause 1 is eliminated, I would suggest that Operative Clause 2, sub clause b be eliminated. Since the final status of the islands will be decided in a negotiations, then the 2-kilometer exclusive zone would be a bit moot. If my colleague from the Philippines agrees, excellent, if not, India finds no objection with the current wording.
Secondly, India would like to suggest a rephrasing of operative 1 to include and other parties to the conflict in the amendment. In reference to China. Still since in subclause b clearly states that China will negotiate with the Asean Member States, this amendment falls in the category of cosmetic (or for those with a darker sense of humor nitpicky).
A final suggestion would be to appoint Singapore and Japan (who have no territorial claims to the Spratlys) as mediators.
Notwithstanding, this amendment eases the concerns of India and of other states that had expressed objections with the original UNOL-R1. I commend the right honorable gentleman from the Philippines for his foresight and willingness to compromise by presenting this amendment.