Just twentyfive years ago, on 1 November 1956, the institution of adoption was created in Dutch law. Before that date the Dutch authorities had occasionally come into contact with adoption, when, for example, a person invoked his status as an adopted child acquired by virtue of a foreign law and, hence, the question arose whether the foreign adoption should have effect in the Netherlands. Since 1956, an ever increasing stream of adoption requests by Dutch couples has been submitted to the Dutch courts. Over the years, the number of adoptions of foreign children increased and the cases in which foreign law had to be considered came to be more frequent than all-Dutch cases.

The question of defining self-determination and of determining the legitimacy of claims of self-determination have been issues which have exercised the minds of international lawyers and political scientists for many years. A considerable literature and diversity of views has resulted. From the reference in Articles 1(2) and 55 of the United Nations Charter to the development of “friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and selfdetermination of peoples” has sprung a whole body of United Nations and state practice in a number of widely differing situations. The main focus of activity has been in the area of decolonisation and this development has practically eclipsed Chapters XI–XIII of the Charter, which were clearly intended to deal with the emancipation of non-self-governing and trust territories. The seventeen words of Articles 1(2) and 55 have been elaborated in the 1970 Declaration on Friendly Relations. It is no overstatement to say that the elaboration of the principle of self-determination in the 1970 Declaration provides the cornerstone of the United Nations approach to the concept. The Declaration was the result of seven years work by a Special Committee and was adopted on a consensus vote. It is generally regarded as being normative in character by virtue of its elaboration of essential Charter principles. This elaboration seeks to state the nature of the right in general terms and to deal with the application of the rule in certain contexts; it is concerned primarily with decolonisation and with limiting claims to secession.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a military view of the possibilities and constraints associated with the establishment and maintenance of a multi-national armed force which can be deployed immediately for peacekeeping operations and is thus combat ready. A number of specifically national and legal facets of the military problems will be elucidated in supplementary comments by General De Lange.

My colleague, General Woerlee, has explained that I will elucidate a number of specific national juridical aspects which relate to the military problems he has described. In doing this I will restrict myself – as this afternoon's third speaker – not only because I am more directly responsible than the other speakers for making certain that enough time is left for discussion after these introductions, but especially because I do not wish to deviate too far from the subject at hand this afternoon, viz., the peacekeeping operations of the UN and public international law.

In attempting to formulate the principles of law regulating transfrontier pollution, it is helpful to recall the experience of states in dealing with this kind of pollution. I propose, therefore, to say something about the Canadian and United States experience in this matter, concentrating on three problems relating to water resources, namely pollution of the Great Lakes, pollution of waters caused by acid rain, and the damage threatened in Canadian waters by the Garrison Diversion project in the United States.