---- CAR This seems an important area given the increasing exploitation of undersea resources. CGC Absolutely. A case increasingly has been made that some dependencies are held onto for geo-economic, as well as geo-strategic reasons. This is evidenced in the international claims being made through international treaty mechanisms such as those which emerged from the Law of the Sea Treaty. If you look at the nature of claims being made by some administering powers at the 'Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf ,' for example, you will see that the retention of some dependencies figures prominently in the claim for resources. Ironically, there was a resolution adopted at the time of the negotiations on the Law of the Sea Treaty related to the protection of the marine resources for the people of the territories, but it is rarely invoked. I recall some years ago that reference to the Law of the Sea was proposed in a decolonization resolution, but there was an objection from several non-states parties to the treaty -- even as the reference would have otherwise been consistent with their otherwise progressive position vis a vis decolonization. Some have argued that self-determination for a number of territories is being impeded by the geo-strategic military and geo-economic natural resource considrations. ***** CAR And other resolutions, then? CGC Regarding other resolutions, there were two adopted by the Decolonization Committee related to information from non self-governing territories. One reaffirms the obligation of the administering powers under the U.N. Charter