CONFIDENTIAL
self-determination did not apply to Gibraltar it became logically impossible to put in references in UN Resolutions to the wishes or need for self-determination of the "people" of Gibraltar. Subsequent debates within the UK Government about whether to use "interests" or "wishes", and whether these were identical, were perhaps academic given its initial commitment to self-determination in the case of Gibraltar, but the emphasis on 'wishes' remained. (The Gibraltarians' entitlement to self-determination is of course limited by the terms or Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht which stipulates that the Crown of Spain "should be given first refusal if the Crown of Great Britain" should ever wish to give Gibraltar up). More stress was also subsequently laid on the right to self-determination since the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights were adopted in 1966 and came into force in 1976 (the UK ratified them in that year). Article 1 of both Covenants affirms the right of all
Within the framework of these "peoples" to self-determination. general principles, the aims of UK policy have been to provide the Dependent Territories with security and political stability, and with efficient honest government, and to help their inhabitants to achieve rates of economic and social development at least comparable with, if not superior to, those found in the neighbouring countries in the region. Wherever possible the UK has also tried to encourage the emergence of locally elected governments with increasing respons-
However, the circumstances ibility for their own internal affairs.
of each territory differ widely, and UK policy for each has had to be considered separately. Our basic position, as was pointed out in the Joint Planning/Research Department paper of January 1983 on the Falklands, Hong Kong and Gibraltar, is that HMG stands by their commitments to each territory rather than by any given set of principles.
CONFIDENTIAL
4