A/32/PV.42 General Assembly

Eleven years ago, thiS General Assembly adopted resolution 2J45 (XXI), which termi- nated the Mandate of South. Africa over Namibia and placed the Territory under the direct control of the United Nations. Thereafter, this body created the United Nations Council for Namibia [resolution 2248 (S-V)J ~o administer. the Territory until it attained full indepeudence. 2. But what are Wf' experiencing now? Despite all the resolutions, both those of the Security Council and of the General Assembly, South Africa still refuses to quit Namibia. Year after year the question of Namibia appears on the agenda of the United Nations General Assembly. Both the A' ~mbly and the Security Council !;~ave often enough der AIded the unconditional withdrawal by South Africa of all its military and police forccs, and the termination of its illegal and .Jppre~ive oGcupation of Namibia. Many calls have been fruitlessly made for elec- tions under United Nations authority. The South African military build·up from the Atlaatic coast to the Caprivi Strip has bcen roundly condemned, with little effect. The South African response to all this has always ~en either contemptuous or slippery. 3. The Namibian issue is one over which the apartheid r~gUn~ is basically in direct military confrontation with the United Nations, despite periodic parleys. During this oonfrontation the regime has already claimed to possess an ade,!uate military deterrent of the conventional type. It is now trying in great haste to acquire a nuclear deterrent as NEW YORK well, after which, in all probability, instead of defying and deceiving the United Nations it will merely ignore it. It is ironical and unfortunate that in this sinister effort apart- heid should have received help from Members of this very - . Organization and that, pending the acquisition of the rmal deterrent, it should be so constantly shielded by a triple veto from the full pressures which this Organization could exert for the early release of Namibia. 4. South Africa's refusal to withdraw from Namibia, as is well know, stems mainly f!om its economic interests in the Territory. That is amply a~monstr<ited in chapter IV of General Assembly documen'~ A/32{23/Re..;.1 of 15 Sep- tember 1977. Economic exploitation i~ tile comeI-stone of South Africa's continued domination of Namibia; it is the raison d'etre of all political repression in the Tetlitc,I}'. 5. To hold on better to its illegal domination of Namibia, South Africa is actively encouraging foreign. interests to invest heavily in the Territory. According to available data, capital invested in N:t.~!bia by foreign interests has gener- ated an increase in its gross domestic product from 36 million rand to about 700 million rand in 1976-an increase of nearly 20 times the orijIlal investment. However, tltilt domestic growth means .little development, as tte exploi- tation L~ practised in total disregard for the r:ghts and interests of the African population which still lives below the poven:' line. IS. It is a well-known fact that in Namibia the average wage of an African worker is only one seventeenth t11at of a white worker. The actual estimated average wages for black and white skilled workers are $250 and S4,250 respectively. The argument advanced in certain quarters that investments lead to economic growth is untenable in Namibia where ~i::xed exploitation is the order of the day. The foreign itlterests fInd their presence in Namibia so lucrative that, despite th(~ so-called political uncertainty reported by the South AfIican press, especially the Fillancitzl Mail of Johannesburg,. none of those operating in the Territory in defiance of the United Nations resolutions is considering withdrawal, let alone lessening its moral and financial support for South Africa's illegal regime. 7. At this juncture perhaps one or two statistical details may not be out of place just by way ofillustration. 8. The Consolidated Diamond Mines of South West Africa, Ltd., has from 1970 to 1974 reported a cumulative net profit of 308.6 million rand and paid the South African Government a total of 160.5 mmion rand in taxes alone. Those taxes are South Africa's main source of revenue from Namibia. 10.· It is estimated that South Africa's uranium p~tential amounts to about 300,000 metric tens. That means that South Africa could become self=-suffici'ent in energy produc- tion, thus lessening the impact of a petroleum embargo, and it could be in a position to satisfy one third of anticipated world demand by 1985. Certain countries are expected to benefit tremendously from the development ofthe Rossin3 uranium mine, and some of them have already contracted to purchase the Rossing output at prices well bt~low the cu:rent market level throughout the 19808. One clJtmtry is especially interested because, according to the contrnct, it would pay only $13 per pound for Rossing output instead of the free market price of $40 were it 'lo buy from other sources. 11. Cheap African labr.mr is a contributory factor to the huge profits realized from the Rossing mine. Afritan workC1S eam between 0.24 to 1.50 nmd per hour. 12. My del~gationfeels strongly that tlle time has come to end both the political servitude of Uamibia and the grave economic explo~~~tion which is its main CJbjective. OUI position on this lu~.s often been stated in the past-most recently at the Assembly of HeGds of Statemd Govern- ment of the Organization of African Unity [OAU] in Lihrevi1le last July-and we beg leave to reiterate it, for all that has happened sinc~ then merely strengthens the conviction with which we adhere to those views: 13. Namibia has been described as the Rhodesian situation writ large. It repeats in a worsened form the worst features of Rhodesia. The regime in Namibia is nothing less than an alien aggressor in illegal military occupation of United Nations territory. Its use of spurious constitutional talks there has been more systematic and its use of powerless traditional puppets more unscrupulous. Its oppression is more thorough, its racism more offensive, its acts of aggression against its neighbours on a larger scale, its military build-up more dangerous, and its defiance of the legitimate administering Power more brazen and more sustained. In the Rhodesian situation there is no element of danger to international peace and security which is not present in much larger measure in Namibia. The danger in RhodeSia was recognized by the Security Council in 1966; the more serious threat of Namihia is still denied by the same Council in 1977. 14. On those grounds alone there shou:d bt~ mobilization on all fronts to bring that curious situation to an end. Permanent members of the Security Council which may intend to keep using the triple veto will, it is hoped, recognize that that would be against all reason at the present time. There will of course be the often-heard contention that action undel Chapter VII ofthe Charter of 15. We might also hear yet again thefamiJar argument that South Africa, this time under pressure from the five Western Powers, is now demonstrating its intention of accepting free elections under United Nations supervision in compliance with .security Council resolution 385 (1976). But this, again, surely looks like merely a variation on an dd theme. It has always been the strategy of the apartheid regime ..to defy the demands of the General Assembly and the Security Council until the pressure of intematiohal and public opinion forces the Council to reply with more effective pressures, such as the threat of expulsion from the United Nations or of action under Chapter VII. At that point the apartheid regime makes a feint, puts up a pretence of yiefding, defuses the pressure or enables it to be defused, then reverts to its previous defiance. 16. This manoeuvre has been repeated three or four times already. Any examination ofthe record will show that such exactly was their response to the finding of the Interna- tional Court of Justice demanding that South Africa terminate forthwith its illegal occupation of Namibia. The reaction was the same to the subsequent action taken on that fmding by the Security Council in 1973. Such exactly was the response to Security Council resolution 366 (1974) of December 1974 and its review in May 1975; such was the response to Security Council resolution 385 (1976) of early 1976 and its review in August 1976. By that time the argument had worn pretty thin that Vorster was again negotiating over Namibia, this time with Mr. Kissinger, and that, therefore, sanctions were inappropriate. 17. Today the pressures are building up again for effective measures against South Africa. There are undoubtedly some who hope that the pressures can be defused yet again, if South Africa presents a somewhat more persuasive appear- ance of being reasonable, and .of being willing to negotiate, to move ·along the path prescribed by resolution 385 (1976), and to substitute for the farce of Tumhalle some elective process with some sort of United Nations involvement. 18. This, however, is deceptive. In its effective answer SWAPO ha~, i1'1 the view of my delegation, hit the nail on the head. What the Security Council resolutions now ~all for is not merely United Nations observation of or involvement in an election controlled ult!mately by the Pretoria Government backed b~' its military forces of occupation, for this would imply recognition of the legality of South Africa's administration contrary to the explicit injunction of the Interoational Court of Justice that St&t6i: Members of the United Nations should refrain from acts implying recognition of '~he legality of South Africa's 19_ My delegation also reaffmns the Maputo Declaration2 in which it is emphasized that Walvis Bay should remain an integral part ofNamibia and which rejects all South African attempts to separate Walvis Bay from the rest of Namibia, with which it is inextricably linked by geographical, historical, economic, cultural and ethnic bonds. SOlith Africa's claim to Walvis Bay once again lays bare its expansionist intentions even when Namibia becomes an independent sovereign State. It is a farce to imagine a country sovereign when its coastal borders are infested with foreign hostile naval bases and fishing industries which have no economic relevance to it. The recent Panama Canal Treaties should serve as a guiding principle to Vorster to contemplate forthwith the abandonment of Walvis Bay when Namibia eventually becomes an independent sover- eign State. It is difficult to imagine how South Africa and independent Namibia could live in harmony and respect each other's territorial borders if South Africa still owned part ofNamibian territory. 20. I would Ii1ce to conclude by reverting to the hint made _ earlier in this statement that there is a tiIpe-limit within which Namibia must be saved. The United Nations is today debating the issue of Namibia in the shadow of a nuclear menace. The obvious strategy ofQpartheid South Africa is to maintain the present phase of confrontation in which it will continue to defy, deceive and outwit the United Nations, until the time comes when it can fmally end the game by a nuclear stalemate. And by all indications that time .is not far off. It is for us in the United Nations to decide whether we will take appropriate measures to forstall such a humiliating outcome now, and not when it is too late.

Regarding the question of Namibia now under consideration, there seems to be a position which is accepted by virtually all the Members of this Organization. It is the position set out in Security Council resolution 385 (1976), which was adopted unanimously on 30 January 1976. The resolution reaffmns ill the frrst place 28. Secondly, all the elements of Securit'j CouncU resolu- tion 385 (1976) that are necessary to enable the Namibian people to express their will truly and freely should be 1 Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of implemented. Most important of all is the problem related South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding to the withdrawal of the South African armed forceS. Security Council Re.,lution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, I.CJ. Inasmuch as the Namibian people are to decide their own Reports 1971, p. 16. 2 See Officilzl Records of the Security Council, Thirty-second political future, the cOl:.tinlAed presence of the South Year, Supplement for July, Augustand September 1977, document Mrican armed forces, which have symbolized the illegal S/12344/Rev.l, annex V. occupation and rule of Namibia by South Africa for a long 22. In addition to these elements stated in resolution 385 (1976) there is another important element which is very widely accepted in this Organization: that is, the special status of SWAPO in representing the will of the Narnibian people. 23. It is my delegation's basic position that a solution to the Namibian problem should be sought on the basis of Security Council resolution 385 (1976), with particular importance attached to the participation of SWAPO in any arrangements leading to Namibia's indtpendence. 24. Over the past year there has been some development in the problem ofNamibia. There is nothing which warrants open optimism. Nevertheless, when we remember that no proress had been ma!ie on this problem for more than a decade since the adoption of resolution 2145 (XXI) by the General Assembly, we ~not help seeing a ray of hope in that recent development. 25. For several months we have known that five members of the Security CouncD were taking initiatives to bring South Africa closer to the position of the United Nations as set forth in Security Council resolution 385 (1976) and that they have also been holding talks with SWAPO. My delegation was encouraged to see the joint communique issued by Canada, France, the Federal Republie of Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States and the identical statement made by SWAPO on 11 August of this year, saying, in particular: uthe two sides agreed that there existed possibilities for a negotiated settlement of the issue consistent with Security Council resolution 385 (1976)." 26. On the flI'St day of debate on this item, my delegation listened carefully to the statement by Mr. Sam Nujoma, President of SWAPO {35th meeting], which described for us SWAPO's position. My delegation can support SWAPO's basic position,. as expressed in Mr. Nujoma's statement, regarding necessary arrangements for independence. 27. First, we would be opposed to any attempt designed to take advantage of the five countries' in:'tiatives by promoting anything contrary to genuine independence based on the freely-expressed will of the Namibian people. 30. My delegation, therefore, appeals to the Republic of South Africa to d~continue all the measures and practices which are contrary to what this world body, with the help of five members of the Security Council, is seeking to realize. We appeal also to South Africa to accept all the conditions necessary to allow the Namibian people to make their political decision with complete freedom. 31. What we in the United Nations mur.t do at this juncture is obvious. First, we must encourage and give support to the efforts to arrange a negotiated settlement and refrain'from taking any action which may adversely affect these efforts. As our Foreign Minister said in his statement of 27 September in the general debate [8th Meeting], Japan supports the serious efforts of the five countries in search of a peaceful solution to the problem, and we are prepared to play our part in United Nations efforts to resolve this problem when it comes to such a stage. 32. Secondly, we must also sustain our joint efforts by maintaining a united position against South Africa's illegal occupation of the Territory and restricting our relations with South Mrica with regard to Namibia to the maximum extent possible. alarmingly as a consequence of the colonialist, racist policy of apartheid of the Pretoria regime. This situation not only is unbearable for the Namibian people and anathema to human ~onscience, but is at the same time a serious threat to peace and security in Africa. 33. Japan will continue to enforce the measures it has taken to co-operate with the United Nations in achieving its aims. Japan has prohibited direct investment in Namibia by Japanese nationals or bodies corporate umJer its juris- diction, and will continue to prohibit it. 34. Japan has strictly prohibited the sale of arms and military equipmellt to South Africa by Japanese nationals or bodies corporate under its jurisdiction, and will continue to prohibit them. 35. Specifically with regard to the question of uranium, roth the Government and business circles of Japan have given serious thought to the question of purchasing uranium from Namibia. 36. I can assure members of this body that there is no record showing Japan's importing uranium from Namibia. Regarding a Japanese company's relations with the Rio Tinto linc Corporation, Ltd., owner of the Rassing uranium mine, which are referred to in the report of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples [A/32/ 23/Rev.l, chap. VII], my delegation has learned that the Japanese party to the sales contract'with that company has decided to hold the contract so that the importation of the uranium envisaged under the contract will not take place under the prevailing circumstances. 39. In concluding, my delegation wish.es to ex:»ress its sincere hope that the determined efforts of five members of the, Security Council and the co-operative and constructive attitude of SWAPO will overcom~ the still remaining difficulties and bring about genuine independence for Namibia at the e~rliest possible time-we hope, by the next session of the General Assembly, as the Permanent Repre- sentative of Canada suggested in the statement he made on behalf..of five member States of the Security Council during the current debate [38th meeting}.

For 31 ye2fS now the question of Namibia has been on the agenda of each session of the United Nations General Assembly. Eleven years have passed since the United Nations terminated South Africa's Mandate over Namibia. Yet, as the reports of the United Nations Council for Namibia and the Special Committee show convincingly, the situation in that country has not improved at all since -that time. On the contrary, the situation has deteriorated 41. We have the right to ask why the Vorster regime can thus flout the disapproval of the entire world and obsti- nately refuse to abide by the many decisions and resolu- tions adopted in the United Nations, the only legal Administering Authority over the Territory of Namibia until it attains its independence? In the opinion of my delegation, it is useful to look back at the history of past few decades to fmd an appropriate reply to that question. 42. There was a time when imperialism, acting as an international gendarme, carried out interventions and open and massiye aggressions against the countries and peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Having suffered resounding defeats and being condemned by all mankind, it had to change its tactics, but it continued its aggressive policy by usir.g regional gendarmes and local reactionary regimes, thus hoping to avoid the condemnation of the peoples of the world. In southern Africa it strive to establish and economically and militarl1y to consolidate the regimes of Vorster and Smith in order to transform them into regional gendarmes to maintain the final bastions of colonialism in Africa. 43. Having the racist apartheid regimes at their beck and call, the imperialists are now speaking of so-called "non- intervention in the internal affairs of the African peoples". Everyone knows that these are simply '~es meant to deceive world public opinion, to camouflage the real intentions of 45. This means to sow discord and division among the African countries in order to weaken the.forces of national independence, democracy and social progress. 46. To this end, imperialism uses traditional procedures: "divide and rule", trying to exploit the differences between nations and to raise questions that have been bequeathed by colonialism so as to pit Africans against each other, as in the Horn of Africa area. This also means that the imperialists utilize their economic potential to consolidate the reactio~ary regimes in southern Africa. The represen- tatives who spoke before me and the relevant reports of the United Nations have shown quite clearly that, notwith- standing the imposition by the United Nations of economic sanctions, several imperialist countries have continued their economic, financial and military aid to Vorster's regime. 47. This means, lastly, that the imperialists are trying to use the United Nations' name to camouflage their sinister designs. In the past, despite the energetic protests of several Member countries, the imperialists succeeded in using the United Nations flag to carry out activities that were not in accord with the Charter and were contrary to the legitimate interests of the peoples .of Korea and of the Congo. We believe that the Members of our universal Organization~ anxious to preserve its noble purposes an~ principles, will never allow the imperialists to usurp once more the name of the United Nations and use it against the peoples of southern Africa. 48. The contacts made between the Western ~ountries in the Security Council and the Vorster regime to bring about a negotiated settlement in Namibia have now been made public. We do not oppose a negotiated solution. Never- theless, experience gained during these long, hard years of patriotic struggle against a powerful and treacherous enemy has obliged the Vietnamese people to be vigilant. The United States of America, the United Kingdom and certain other Western countries, which have strategic, economic, military and other interests closely linked to the interests of the regime of Pretoria, which have not applied the decisions and resolutions of the United Nations with regard to Namibia and which have abused their veto power to protect the racist regime of South Africa, are now claiming that they are bringing pressure to bear on that regime to comply with the General Assembly and Security Council resolu- tions, in particular resolution 385 (1976), and to agree to terminate its illegal occupation of Namibia, which it has categorically refused to do for 11 years. Is this a normal, logical state of affairs, especially since the sQacalled "initia- ma~ion on the contents of the contacts in question, nevertheless common sense and logic force us to remain vigilant with regard to manoeuvres of imperialism aimed at safeguarding its strategic, economic and other interests to the detriment of the Namibian people. 49. In view of the situation now prevailing in Namibia, and of the imperialist manoeuvres, the best way to demonstrate our solidarity with the people ofNamibia is, in my delegation's opinion, to reaffmn unequivocally the staunch position of the United Nations, as expressed in the decisions and relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, to condemn most energetically the fresh manoeuvres of the Pretoria regime designed to strengthen its illegal occupation of that Territory, to support the position of SWAPO as set forth in the declaration of 24 September 1977 by the Central Com- mittee of SWAPO reaffirming that "... a negotiated settle- ment with regard to the independence of Namibia can be reached only on the basis of the total withdrawal of the armed forces ofSouth Africa from Namibia"_ 50. Ir. the light of the present situation in Namibia, the Central Committee of SWAPO decided "to continue and to increase the armed struggle, considering it as the most effective means of forcing the racist regime of South Africa to terminate its illegal occupation ofNamibia"• 51. The Vietnamese people are deeply grateful to all our friends throughout the world for their abiding, uncon- ditional support for our legitimate position throughout all the stages of our long and extremely difficult struggle for national liberation. This was a priceless contribution, which effectively contributed to our people's victory. At the present time, the valiant sons of tlle Namibian people are now shedding their blood both at the front and in the interior to defend their inalienable right to live in indepen- dence, freedom and dignity. The international community has a duty to support by all means the legitimate struggle of the Namibian people. Any action calculated to weaken that struggle will merely delay a peaceful solution to the Namibian problem, thus prolonging the suffering of the Namibian people. 52. The Socialist Republic ofViet Nam wishes to reaffirm its full solidarity with the patriotic struggle of the Namibian people, and to join with the international community in vehemently condemning tile regime of South Africa for its illegal and prQtracted occupation of Namibia and the imperialists for their collusion with the Pretoria regime. The Socialist Republic of Viet Nam will spare no effort to make a positive contribution, together with the peoples of Africa and of the world, to the just struggle of the people of Namibia until they attain final victory• S4..Mr. JANKOWITSCH (Austria): As the yean pass, the situation in Namibia has become more and more serious. We seem to have reached a stage where it has become increasingly apparent to all of us that any further delay in reaching a solution is utterly perilou3 not merely for southern Africa, but for peace and international securit)¥ all over the world. ss. 'It seems, therefore, that a sense of urgency has become an-pervasive. The struggle of the Namibian people has now reached a crucial stage. My delegation therefore deems it mast appropriate that this year the question of Namibia is being discussed in the plenary meetings of the Assembly. This debate, which we have followed with great attention and whose quality has highly impressed us, should provide us with a much needed opportunity to evaluate thoroughly all aspects of the problem, including the most recent developments, and to decide on the coUr!e ofaction we shall follow. 56. The goal to be achieved has never been in doubt, although for all too long the international community has failed to execute the sacred trust regarding Namibia held oot as a pro~ to the Namibian people as long ago as half a ce.ntury. It is. only the attainment of freedom, indepen- deace and sovereignty for a united multiradal Namibia which can fulfd this trust of the international community. 57. However, despite all the promises held O\1t, despite all the appeals made and the pbns elaborated, South Africa continue~ in defWlce of intemationallaw, to occupy and administer Namibia illegally. 58. Austria in the past has unequivocalIy denounced this illegal occupation and has vigorously supported every effort to bring about change and the rule of international law in Namibia. 59. The United Nations, through its General Assembly, as well as the Security Council. has devi:led several plans and methods to achieve that goal. It seems that no stone hu been left untumed in the lengthy and persistent pwsuit ofa 'JOlution. Seauity Council resolution 385 (1976) illustrates in a I1lOCt comprehensive and construC'U'1e manner the acnonl apeement on the requirements for a peaceful solution. In its paragraph 7 the resolution says, among othor things: . '\ •• in order that the- people ofNamibia may beonabled frool)' to determine their own fututo. it i&imperative that (lOO ol~t1on& under the supervision and control of the United Nations, bo held for tho whole- of Namibia as onc political ontity ...... \.~ 60. Rosolution 385(1976) furthermont uqently domudod a solomn docluation on the put ofSouth Afrial 61. Austria welcomed this decision of the Security Coun· ciJ, and my country remains CC!nvinced that it provides the most workable buis 10 far for proaress towards a solution. We continue to believe also that any solution requires the active participation of the people of Namibia and, in particular, SWAPO, their authentic represenhtive. 62. Indeed, developments since the adoption of Security Council resolution 385 (1976) have proved its value as a basis for further 'enersetic effort~ When the resolution was passed, the so-caUed constitutional conference was still in full swing in Windhoek, a conference pretending to deliber- ate ob and to decide the future of Namibia. leaving out SWAPO and leaving out the United Nations as the international authority entrusted with the fate of Namibia. 63. Another important contribution in the process of increasing worldpressure on the South African Government was, m_e by the resolutions of the past session of the AMembly, which apparently also had some effect on the thinking inSouth Africa. 64. International concern, however, found its most vivid expression so far at the International Conference in Support of the Peoples of Zimbabwe and Namibia,.held in Maputo in May of this year. I am glad to say that Austria contributed to the holding ofthis important gatheringt and participated actively in iu deliberations and decisions. In its Declaration the Conference solemnly proclaimed its full support for the just struggle of the people of Namibia and for the leadership of SWAPO. It denounced the Tumhalle tribal talks. labelled as a constitutional conference, and urged that recognition be withheld from any result ofthese talks. It was reaffirmed that free elections should be held urgently under the supervision of the United Nations for the entire Territory as a unit and that. prior to such elections, conditions for a negotiated settlement should be created in Namibia. 65. The unanimity with which the world community stood behind these and other basic conclusions was indeed impressi~. The Conference was therefore justly described as a ImdJnark in the history of the liberation struggle in southern Africa. 66. But it is important no~ LO cany the spirit ofMaputo over into other forums. Maputo has reassured those struggling for freedom and independence in Namibia and has told them that they are not alone and that they can depend on our support. It has inspired the United Nations IIld its competent bodies, in particular the United Nations Council for Namibia, the United Nations Commissioner fur Namibia. and the Special Committee. to whose efforts we should like to pay a particular tribute at this stage.. It has ·11150 been an encouragement to Governments to re.-examine , their poIides with a view to: further promoting the cause of an early settlementofthis dangerous crisis. 69. We are also encouraged by the fact that international assistance to Namibians has been intensified and broadened in scope. The Institute for Namibia, based in Lusaka and so important for the Territory's future requirements and manpower, has made an excellent start. The Nationhood Programme for Namibia is well on its way and more and more international organizations are getting involved in its planning and implementation. 70. But, as we look at these developments, which again I should like to qualify as encouraging, we cannot overlook some others, which are troubling. 71. One troubling development of this nature is the possibility ta'tat South Afri~ might acquire a nuclear capacity, a development which has caused grave concern in . the international community at large. Another development of equally immediate relevance to Namibia is the declared intention of South Africa to retain Walvis Bay as part of ·South Africa even after the creation of an independent Namibia. We are also profoundly dismayed and disap- pointed that the situation with regard to human rights in Namibia appears unchanged and that the South African Government remains adamant in refusing to engage in direct talks with SWAPO. These factors are not likely to influence favourably the chances for the peaceful settle- ment that is so urgently needed and for which all parties involved have expressed a sincere desire. And the few timid steps taken recently by South Africa to dismmtle the machinery of repression, built up over many years to defend the bulwark of apartheid, have not yet convinced us. The hesitancy and et'en scepticism of SWAPO must therefore be seen in the light ofsuch factors and its courage and political wisdom in continuing the current efforts duly appreciated. 72. We must therefore strive not to lose the momentum gained towards the achievement of our goal ofan indepen- dent Namibia. We must pursue all our efforts with rigour and detennination. The support of the struggl8 of the Namibian people and the pressure on South Africa to 73. Let me conclude by quoting an eloquent sentence from a recent study of the Minority Rights Group, so ably led by the eminent British advocate of human rights, Ben Whitaker. In the study entitled The Namibians of South West Africa. it is said: "Given an early and constructive approach by all the governments concerned, Namibia can join the family of nations, a mass.a\re injustice will have been removed and the new country will be an asset not just to her own people but to the rest of the world. Failure to resolve the dispute wm lead to disaster in Africa and may destroy the· International Court and the UN as effective means of settling international disputes peacefully andjustly."3

Over 10 yers ago the General Assembly declared that South Africa's occupation of Namibia was illegal, and decided to place the Territory under the responsibility of the United Nations. Since that time both the General Assembly and the Security Council have adopted a number ofresolutions on the subject. When year after year these resolutions are repeated, it proves on the one hand that there is a wide consensus in the international community on the problem, and, on the other, it becomes obvious that the Organization is unable to implement the resolutions it has itself adopted. 7S. The record ofour meetings shows clear reason for that apparent" paradox. If th~ United Nations has been unable to act effectively to obtain justice for the people ofNamibia, if the United Nations has been forced to Witch helplessly while Pretoria extends to Namibia the ignominy ofapart- heid, and ifas a result ofthis numberless patriots have been tortured or persecuted with fury by the racist troops, the responsibmty f41ls wholly and exclusively on the imperitlist Powers that supported and continue to support tile racist r6gime of Pretoria and its aggressive designs against the African peoples. It is those Powers that are responsible because of the support they have given and continue to give South Africa i~ the Organization by preventing the adop- tion ofeffectiveineasures, carrying ~ut diplomatic manoeu- vre, that benefit the racists, and hampering any resolute action on the part of the international community. It is they who bear the blame, because ofthe support they gave and are still giving outside the Organization to South Africa, thanks to their enonnous investments, trade ex- changes, military co-operation, sales of weapons and tech- nical assistL'lCC which has reached the extreme of allowing the Fascist group of Pretoria to develop a nuclear capacity. 76. The position adopted by different 'States on the question ofNamibia and on the policy ofthe South African r6gime wlll stand before histoIY as the best flxplanation for 3 See Peter Fraenke!, The Namibians of South West A/ric. (London, Minority Rights Group, 1974). p. 47. 77. The Governments comprising that .minority, allied as they are to South Africa white also feignillg great concern for bumallrights. share the guilt for the extension of apartheid to the Territory of NtUllibia. for the Fascist terror unleash~d aguinst its inhabitants. and for the crimes, the outra.ges and the suffcrings in\posod on an entire nation. 78. However·scandalous this may appear to us th.is situation might Ilt\Ye gone on indefinitely had it not been that the peoples of Africa, led by their revolutionary vanguards and with th.e solid backing of the anU-imperialist fOfl'eS of the rest of the world, were able in the last few years to gain decisive victories that have marked a perma- nent change of direction in the course of African history~ have radically transformed political realities on tbat l:on- tinent and have pushed colonialisn\ and racism to the very brink ofbankruptcy. • 79. The heroic strussle of the peoples led to the eollapse of the Portuguese empire and wi~d out the support bases that the regimes of Pretoria and Salisbury had enjoyed in those Territories. Angola and Mozambique arc no longer. and will never again be. the private backyard of the racists. Those two countries are today Ule unshakeable bulwarks of African freedom aad strong bastions fortlle movements of national liberation of the peoples still under foreign occupation. Thus, with Ulls in mind, now and more favourable conditions have been created for the struggle for enumcipation of the peoples of Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa, led as they are by their sole legitimate spokesmen, the true liberation movements, SWAPO, the Patriotic Fr()~'( of Zimbabwe and the African National Congress ofSouth Africa. 80. The burgeoning of the armed struggle in these Terri- tories and the grOWing popular resistance to racist repres- sion are so many realities that cannot be ignored by anyone today, and they are expressed in the feats perfomlcd by the fighters.. They touch off the rebellion of Ule women and of the schoolchildren, and almost daily are reported on the front pages of the newspapers of the world. 81. It is against this background that we must assess the intense diplomatic activity that seems, in the last few months, to have centred on southem Africa. Those who for lllany years turned a deaf eat to the African c1ainls, today have become hasty cartographers Who, too tardily, seem to have discovered a continent which fot far too long they ignored entirely. Those who mc,w meaty profits from the racist exploitation of labour, those who closed their eyes to the misery and the wretchedness that colonialism had visited on millions of Africans, today advocate a deceptive message of conclliationand want to be believed when they promise to solve peacetully the drama which the apartheid regime. In Namibia its plan to organize the puppet elomcnts and to sweep aside SWAPO. which stands as the sole representative of the peoplo. its declared intention to annex Walvis Bay. and Us refusal to withdraw all its troops and its megal administration immediately and unconditionally only conflrnl·~if we needed further con- firmatiGn;=the justness of the stand taken by the inter- national community. 83. Even llOW. while the debate in the Assembly eentres on Namibia, while its allies have been trying to pcrsuade us of the appropriateness of starting a peaceful dialogue with Ulcm t Vonter's group has unleashed the most brutal reprcssidn within South Africa itself as though trying lO remind us all=thosc of us who fought it resolutely and those who today still try to defend it=thnt with optlrtltl'id thero is 110 possible conciliation, Ulat Utero will be and thero can be no prospect of ~acc in the zone until it is completely and definitely eliminated. 84. In the last few months many comments and reports have appeared in the press regarding certain initiatives that are being undertaken by certain Westem Powers with the presumed hope of achieving a peaceful solution to the problem of llpartheid and the problem of Namibia. I should like to speak very briefly on that point. We cannot ac.cept any action which implies ignoring the decisions of tb~ General Assembly and the Security Council or which Illight circumvent the authority of the United Nations Council for Namibia Oft albeit indirectly, recognize Ule totally illegal presence of South Africa in the Territory or even chnUellb~ the right of SWA1>Q to be the sole and legitimate rcprescntalive of the people ofNamibia. 8S. The absolute sine quo mm for a peaceful solution is that South Africa must scrupulously comply with Ule pertinent resolutions of the United Nations, and that it must immediately totally and unconditionally withdraw all its troops, war-making hardware and military personnel, dismantle its administration and put an cnd to its illegal occupation of the Territory lhlU1 that happens SWAPO has every right to continue the struggle by whatever means may be at its disposal~ and theintcmational community is in duty bound to give SWAPO the political, diplomatic and material assistance it needs. 86. The Westem friclldsof Pretoria have here avery good opportunity to contribute to n solution to the problcn\ by ceasing to support the apartheid regime and finally by joining the immense majority ofmankind which repudiates it and calls for its elimination. 87.. Far too much time has elapsed. The intemational community has given far too nluch proof oftoo much and unnecessary generosity. Pretoria has had many oppor- tunities to solve the problem had it been ready and had it been imbued with even the minimum of gc,od will. The people of Namibia have 011e inalienable right and that is the 88. There is no reason for false middle positions to be assl,lmed. Those who today do not rise unshakeably with the people of Namibia against their oppressors cannot tomor- row avoid the condemnation of history.

Once again the delegation of the Comoros has the opportunity to demonstrate its support of a people struggling for the full and total liberation of our African soil. 90. The Comoros has this task constantly in mind because nothing is more valuable to us than respect for the principles of our Charter. 91. The Comorian people supports the fraternal people of Namibia in its struggle to recover its sovereignty, indepen- dence and territorial integrity, all the more so since a foreign military Power is continuing to occupy the Comorian island of Mayotte, an integral part of the Republic of the Comoros. 92. I should like to say that our international Organization is running the risk of losing its credibility if it does not strive to take timely and necessary measures so that Namibia can accede to independence in the conditions laid down by our Assembly. That is the only way to prove to all the small States Members of our Organization, such as the Comoros, which do not yet possess military or other means effectively to assure their defence, that they can count on international solidarity and that our Organization is the guarantor of their existence. 93. The expression of s~lidarity which 1 wish to convey today on behalf of the people and the Government of the Comoros towards the people of Namibia is commensurate with the indignation aroused in us by the system of apartheid. The African peoples can no longer suffer human beings to be humiliated and deprived of their freedom simply because of their race or the colour of their skin. 94. It is now more than 11 years that the occupation of Namibia has been of concern to our international Organi- zation. 95. General Assembly resolution 2145 (XXI) proclaimed unequivocally the inalienable right of the Narnibian people to independence, and other resolutions have been adopted along the same lines. 96. The United Nations General Assembly, the Security Council and the United Nations Council for Namibia have adopted various resolutions requesting the South African regime to put an end without delay to its illegal occupation of the Territory of Namibia. In response, that regime has brought in fresh troops to consolidate its occupation of the Territory; it has increased its oppression and repression of the Namibian people. 97. But while South Africa has been able thus to defy all the relevant United Nations decisions and all international 99. According to Mr. Owen, the United Kingdom Secre- tary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs negotiations are now under way by the five Wester~ countries members of the Security Council to establish majority rule in Namibia. It is therefore too early at this stage to make a reasoned judgement on that initiative, but the Government of the Comoros supports any attempt to reach a solution so long as Security Council resolution 385 (1976) is applied. 100. However, if all efforts at a negotiated solution should fail-and we hope that they do not-the five Western countries of the Security Council must shoulder their responsibilities so that the relevant organs of the United Nations impose the necessary sanctions on South Africa. 101. The arrogant attitude of the Pretoria racists will not change spontaneously unless our Organization compels it to do so. The time has come for South Africa to give up the Territory of Namibia and for free elections to be held as soon as possible. 102. The United Nations Council for Namibia and the Special Committee have so far spared no effort, but they have always encountered South Africa's obstinacy in maintaining its military and economic domination of Namibia. 103. It is encouraging to note that the international community has understood that the occupation of Namibia is a serious threat to the maintenance of peace and security in the region and even in the world, and the success of the Maputo and Lagos Conference is proof of the growing solidarity of the international community with the op- pressed peoples of southern Africa. 104. The Republic of the Comoros, faithful to the principles governing States and particularly zealous in its respect for our Charter, cannot but give its total support to the Namibian people in the defence of its legitimate rights and, through it, to its legitimate representative, SWAPO, without which no solution to the problem of Namibia can be envisaged. 105. In our view, it is essential that any general election in Namibia be preceded by the complete withdrawal of all South African military forces, which should be replaced by United Nations forces in order to ensure the best possible conditions for consulting the population. The withdrawal must be accompanied by, first, the immediate freeing of the political prisoners, detainees and persons under house arrest, secondly, the return of all Namibians in exile' and, thirdly, the abrogation of all discriminatory laws and 106. I should like to stress here that the annexation by South Africa of Walvis Bay is unacceptable, and we shall continue to consider Walvis Bay as an integral part of the Territory of Namibia. Such actions by South Africa can only strengthen our view of Pretoria's bad faith in the efforts now under way to reach a negotiated settlement. 107. Namibia is a Territory of the United Nations, The South African regime has not only established an illegal occupation in tht! Territory but has also applied to Namibia the abhorrent policy of apartheid. Several members of SWAPO have been arbitrarily arrested and subjected to all manner of trumped-up charges. Others have been detained and are languishingin South African torture camps. 108. The present session of our General Assembly offers us another opportunity to st.rongthen our resolve to eliminate the repression of th~ racist regime of South Africa. The mandatory arms embargo against Pretoria has been too long delayed. The freedom fighters are falling victim every day to the murderous weapons provided by Pretoria's allies, and, if our Organization does not this time succeed in restoring their legitimate rights to the Namibian. people, the massacre will continue, for the Namibian peopl~, committedto its struggle, is determined to vanquish the forces ofevil.

Eleven yeaIS' ago the United Nations General Assembly took the important ~cision of terminating South Africa~s Mandate over Namibia. It Was in 1967 that the General Assembly e~tablished the United Nations Council for Namibia-of which TlUkey ~ one of the founding members-as the sole legal authority for the Territory until Namibia" attained 5ndependence. Since that time,. our Organization has irIe- v~ably committed itself to the just cause ofthe people of Namibia to achieve its self-determination:> freedom and national independence in a united Namibia. 110. During. the last decade, the question of Namibia has c;ontinuously engaged the concern of the international community ~:thin and outside the United Nations through the activities. of the Council for Namibia, the Special Committee cmd the United Nations Commissioner for Namibia. 111. The ~urity CQuncil, in the discharge ofitspcimary responsibility for maintaining. international peaCC' and secu- rity, has on several oC«asions considered the prevailing sittJation in Namibia and the fu.ture of that Territory~ The fa.~t that th:.imPQrt.ant iS$ue is being taken up at pre~ntin the plenary meetings of the General A~mbly is. certainly most appropriate, for it is high time that the General Assembly make a full aSSCS$ment of the developments c;onceming Namibia over the past 11 years, since- the termination of the Mandate of South Africa over that believes that any negotiated solution of the question of Namibia should take into account the- basi~ prindples contained in Security Council resolution 38S'1976). 112. D\b1ng that period, and es~cially recently,,. the Turkey, as. a member of the Council for Namibia; has Territo~. 1I3. However,. in spite of the persistent efforts of the international community to put an end to the: E1:>horrent policies of racism and apartheid of South Africa as well as to Us; illegal occupation of Narni~ the attitude of the Yretoria regime has continued to be deIWlt and intransi- gent. The Pretoria regime has refused to listen to the voice of reason add has persistently rejected the legitimate demands of the international community. During the last decade~ South Africa has not only continued its illegal occupation. of Namibia but has also consistently stepped up its brutal repressive measures against the: people ofNamibia and. imposed on them its policy ofapartheid.. Detentions,. atrr~1s of patriotic Namibians and plans for bantus- tanization have continued. Sentences fu.we been paSsed against members ofSWAPO. This :irtitude of South Africa violates the principles and purposes of the £barter of the Unr :d Nation",,. the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples: and constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security. 114. We consia~r the recent decision of the Pretoria regime to annex Walvis Bay to contravene the concept of the territorial integrity of Namibia. We believe that Walvis Bay should be an integral part of Namib~with which it is inextricably linked by geographica4 historical,. economic:> cultural and ethni~ bonds. Similarly, the continued mili- tarization. ofNamibi~ South Africa's reported development of nuclear weapons: and current preparations for exploding a nuclear device in the Kalahari Desert region,. and its acU aimed at threatening the territorial integrity and inde- pendence of neighbouring ~~an countries are elements· which ,~xacerbatethE. prevailingsituatioiI in southern Africa and consequently hcrea5l: the menace South Africa already poses to international. peace and security. £IS. The position of the Turkish Government vis-a-vis the questions of southern Africa and,. particularly, Namibia was explained by my Foreign Minister on 3 October 1977 to this Assembly filtil meeting]. The Turkish Government repr.~sentativfJ of the Namibian people, must participate in all negotiations regarding the future of Namibia. As was also stat€d by my Foreign Minister in his adrlress to the General Assembly at its thirty-second session: "... no lasting solution can be found to the questions of Namibia . . . without the active participation of SWAPO" ! 17th meeting, para. 161J. It is the view of my Governo ment that fret} elections, under the supervision and control of the United Nations, should be held as soon as possible. In this connexion, we have followed closely and with interest progress with regard to the recent initiative taken by tne five Western members of the Sec."Urity Council to achieve the implementation of Security Council resolution 385 (1976) and we sincerely hope that their endeavours will result in a negotiated, just and permanent settlement of the question of Namibia, that will enable that Territory to attain its independeDcc before the end of 1978. 116. On the occasion of the opening of the Namibia debate in the General Assembly [35th meetingJ we listened to the President of the United Nations Council.for Namibia, Ambassador Konie, and the President of SWAPO, Mr. Sam Nujoma. Their account of the present situation in Namibia and their assessment of the recent developments are impressive. The views of SWAPO regarding the terms of ongoing negotiations between the five Western countries of the Security Council and South Africa are well founded. We certainly hope that South Africa will this time be re- sponsive to those views so that the momentum of the negotiations can be maintained. In this context I should like to associate my delegation with the proposal made by the President ofSWAPO and point out, too, the importance of convening a special session of the General Assembly on the question of Namibia, if the present negotiations fail to produce a break-through. 117. Turkey sincerely hopes that the Pretoria regime will no longer insist on running counter to the course ofhistory. The Pretoria regime must realize that that course is irreversible and that it will not be able to hold out against the general tide of liberation and independence. The Turkish delegation, like others that spoke before it, sincerely hopes that the independence of Namibia will be attained through an agreed settlement and that advantage will be taken of the present atmosphere, spirit and mo- mentum of negotiations before it is too !<lte. 118. I should like to conclude my remarks by expressing the sincere wish of my delegation that the current session of the General Assembiy will be the last one at Y:ihich the question of Namibia is discussed. We fervently h;:>pe that Namibia will take its rightful and well-deserved place as an independent State during the forthcoming session among the family ofnations in this universal Organization. 119. Mr.' PASTINEN (Finland): More than 30 years ago, the question of Namibia was introduced on the agenda of the United Nations. More than 10 years ago, Namibia became a special !est case and a challenge to this Organi- zation when South Africa's administration of Namibia was 120. The State in question chose not merely to disregard the decisions concerning the territorial status of Namibia taken by the appropriate organs of this Organization in strict accordance with the provisions of the Charter; it chose in fact to defy them, to challenge them and to act contrary to them in every respect. 121. For the people of the Territory that meant that they continued to be deprived of their rights under the Charter, as a people and as a nation to be. It deprived them of all basic human rights, whether political, economic, social or cultural. Finally, it subjected them t~ continued physical and spiritual brutality, suffering and humiliation, as well as to the depletion of the natural resources of their country. That being the case, the deep-rooted feeling ofdistrust and suspicion with regard to anything that the South African Government might choose to undertake is amply justified. 122. The new desperate measures of repression and intensification of apartheid undertaken only a few days ago in South Africa are a telling reminder of that. Yet, there are li."llits to the extent that even the Government of South Africa can resist the weight of international pressure. 123. In April of this year the Government ofSouth Mrica . was compelled to enter into talks with the fIVe Western members of the Security Council and, through them, with SWAPO of Namibia. The talks aimed at finding an acceptable basis for the implementation ofSecurity Council resolution 385 (1976). ·In that process we recognize the importance of the role of the African front-line States and their unstinted support to SWAPO. SWAPO has assumed a constructive and commendable attitude with regard to the talks; it has done so in spite of the fact that the number of recent provocative measures taken by the South African authorities with regard to the Territory hardly inspire confidence. 124. We note with appreciation and support the statement of the President of SWAPO, Mr. Sam Nujoma, on Tuesday in this Assembly in which he reiterated his readiness to continue in good faith the talks with the representatives of the five Powers in order to utilize to the fullest extent the opportunities that the present negotiating. process might offer to reach a peaceful and just solution to this question. President Nujoma's expression of appreciation for every constructive e~fort which Member States may individually or collectively make towards finding an acceptable solution un the basis of relevant United Nations resolutions and decisions is a clear expression of his continued faith in the ability of this Organization and its Member States to help 126. In this context, the Government of Finland, together with those of the other Nordic countries, has expressed its readiness to offer services within the framework of the United Nations with a view to facilitating a peaceful transition to majority rule in Namibia. That offer, as defined by the Finnish Foreign Minister, Mr. Vayrynen, also means that Finland has the political will and is ready to participate in a possible United Nations peace-keeping operation in Namibia-provided, of course, that the Secu- rity Council decides to undertake one. I have no intention of reiterating the particular concern of the Finnish Govern- ment for the justice and well-being of the people of Namibia; that is of long standing. We trust that the concrete proposals that we have submitted to this Organization and which this Organization has accepted are sufficiently well known. 127. The time has come when we should focus our undivided efforts on actions which will be necessary when the actual transfer of power has taken place. For this I should like to make the follOWing two points. 128. First, my Government has consistently considered that the collective responsibility of the United Nations for Namibia also calls for an economic commitment. In that sense we took the initiative in 1972 which led to the establishment of the Fund for Namibia. One of the main purposes of the Fund was to finance a socio-economic survey of the human resources in Namibia. The Institute for Namibia has made a satisfactory contribution in this regard, but we feel that a new and vigorous effort has to be made to increase substantially the contributions both to the Fund for Namibia and to the Institute. 129. Secondly, last year the delegation of Finland pro- posed what is now known as the Nationhood Programme for Namibia.4 Together with the other sponsors who were 130. The legal Administering Authority for Namibia is and continues to be the United Nations Council for Namibia. As a member of that Council my delegation would like to pay a tribute. to the efforts the Council has made for the Namibian people under the inspiring leadership of its President, Ambassador Konie of Zambia. The Council has gained full status in international conferences and has thus been able to represent and protect, in a proper way, the interests of the Namibian people Wl1ich are vital for their future independence. Similarly, the Council has intensified its co-operation with various United Nations agencies and other organizations in order to improve the protection of Namibian interests. 131. A unanimous United Nations response to the efforts to achieve an acceptable solution in Namibia is now called for mor~ urgently than ever. In the words of my Foreign Minister: "In southern Africa we are approaching a situation where the credibility of the United Nations and its very capacity to live up to the Charter are seriously under- mined. If the present opportunities for peaceful solutions are not seized, we shall face a situation where the world Organization collectively and Member States individually will have to review their stands in order to protect the basic principles of the Charter." [ 1Oth meeting, para. lB.} In that context Namibia is a test in which we must not fail. 132. Before concluding, I must say that I am under explicit instructions from my Government to record here in this debate the strongest protest of the Finnish Government at the new oppressive measures adopted by the Government of South Africa a few days ago. It is indeed an affront to the United Nations that at this point we should have to learn about these new manifestations of the totally abhor- rent and inhuman policy of apartheid. These measures deprive the majority of the African population of the last means at their disposal of expressing in a peaceful and democratic way their opposition to apartheid and their aspirations to change. The Government of South Africa must bear the full moral and political responsibility for these actions.

It is certainly not by chance-but if it is we should congratu- late ourselves-that the General Assembly has decided to give priority consideration to the situation prevailing' in Namibia, since by its nature and ramifications it poses a serious threat to international peace and security. 134. It would be pointless to dwell again on an analysis of the many studies made of the attempts by the illegal and 135. Today more than ever 'le must take vigorous action against any serious and prem~ditatedthreat to the establish- ment of the new international order which all the peoples of the world firmly deJ'iland. 136. The peaceful method.s provided for in the Charter for the settlement of internat':onal di£putes are applicable to States which comply with the commitments they made in adheri~g to the Charter. 137. South Africa is not one of them. Since it has delibemtely chosen to go against the ~ide of history- history which we detlire to be filled with outstanding and unceasing ·T~ctories·-we are left with no other choice than to fight it with all the meaI:5 avail~ble to us under the Charter. 138. }n fact" more than 30 years of ::hilly-3haliying with the advocates of apartheid has only resulted in making them mOle arrogant, pernicious and bloodthirsty. Suffice it to refer to chapter VIII of the last repnrt of the Special COJn.Il1l;L, ~ [All2!~,,/Rev.lj and the repoi" of the United Nation~ Council for Namibia fA/32/24J to )ie~Jize the henoe ,.,hklt d!aracterizes the action of the Pretoria C:lVecnment in the imeruational Territory which it has usurped and wh 1se people the international Organization ha" the respomdbility of leading to free political self- detertnl.'lation. 139. Yet, despite the emergency legislation and the use of impressive means of war(are, the Namibian population, under the banner of SWAPO, goes from victory to victory) -1ay by day, on the difficult road to the liberation of its country. 140. The honour and the raison d'etre oftha international Organization demand that it assist and support this glorious struggle which is in fact the struggle provided for in the Charter against any disturbance of the peace and any threat to the dignity of man. 141. Furthermore, we should not be faced by this choice if certain Members of our Organization, in particular those to which the Charter entrusts special responsibility for the maintenance of peace, had not maintained various types of relations With the country that practises the ignominious system of apartheid. notably in the political, economic, milita!y and nuclear fields. That is why, in defiance of the will of almost all Member States, the Pretoria Government continues to flout our Organization. 142. These manifestations of madness, which had already found expression in repeated aggression against Angola. have reached a new intensity with the annexation of Walvis Bay, in accordance with the classic process of gunboat diplomacy. 143. For decolonizing Namibia tll~ United Nations had the legal right to apply the relevant provisions of Chapter .~~sembly on 13 October 1977: "The declaration and programme of action of the International Conference in Support of the Peop!eE of Zimloab\'.e and Namibia, held in Maputo, Mozambique, in May 1977, and the declaration of the World Conference for f,.,ti:::n against Aparth~id. held in Lagos, Nigeria, in August 1977, hai';e produced an appropriate strategy in tlHs regard." f33rd meeting, para. 112.J 144. Were it not a question of the swviva! of millions of persons the constitutional changes which the racists of Pretoria seem prepared to make might simply be taken as part of the comedy which they have never ceased to enact with regard to our Organization. F{\rtunately, international public opinion has n:>t been duped. 145. For its part, Africa considers them as new manifes- tations of the braggadocio of the apmtheid regime, which is more and more on the defensive. It showed that clearly at its latest summit conference held j.,~~t July Libreville. 146. Seasoned in its struggle, true to :t~ traditions of courage, resistance and vigilance, the Namibian people turned the Turnhalle conference into a "nightmare"-to borrow a word from The Star of Johannesburg of 6 November 1976. 147. Furthermol'e, is it not symptomatic that at the same time as the farce of that so-cmied consultation was taking place South Africa should have stepped up its repression in Namibia and carried out massive deportations of the . population and destroyed the area along that country's border with Angola by creating supposed security zones which basically are rifle ranges for the henchmen of Vorster, who still cherishes the mad dream of erecting an infamous "security fence" 2.6 metres high and 420 kilometres long, stretching from Ruacana to Kavangoland? I refer you, in this connexion, to paragraph 29 of the report of the Special Committee fA/32/23/Rev.l, chap. VIIIJ. 148. Therefore, South Africa's determination to perpe- tuate its illegal presence in Namibia is clear. Our actions must measure up to ·that challenge. 149. It is for this reason that the Government of the Republic of Mali -follows mo~.. dtf ;'ntively the initiatives taken by the five Western Powers members of the Security Council, to undertake a dialogue with Vorster for the peaceful decolonization of Namibia. But as the Minister for Foreign Affairs of my country declared in the speech to which I have already adverted: "Vorster's earlier untoward actions and his procrastination in the negotiations under way do not encourage us to be optimisticu f33rd meeting, para. 104J. 150. In fact, apart from these iniquitous laws designed to muzzle and physically destory the people of Namibia, Vorster's nomination of a proconsul in the Territory attests 15L The illegal, racist l'6wme of Pretoria is at present redoublmg its efforts to attra,-t multinational corporations to make massive ~.-Yestments in N~'llibfubecause, according to one ofits spokesmen, the pi'Ofits to be made there are so enormous. 152.. The report of the Special Committee on the activities of foreign interests in. the Territories under foreign domi- natiQn [A/32/23/Rev.l, chap. IV] becomes even clearer when we. consider that aspect of the question. 153. Pretoria's recent annexation of Walvis Bay is, to put it mildly, contrary to all efforts to fmd a peaceful solution to the Namibian trageciy. 154. Pretoria's use of the Kalahari Desert for its fust nuclear tests is in itself an act of war against the Namibian people and the peoples of Africa as a whole. 155. Then too, after the 1960 outlawing of the African National Congress and the Pan Mrican Congress, and after ~ the recent cold-blooded assassination ofSteven Biko, leader of the Black Consciousness movement, only the day before yesterday the gpartheid regime further assaulted freedom in South Africa by gagging what was left of the African press and by carrying out mass arrests of patriots and by prohibiting all associations that were still, with indomitable courage, carrying on the 'LlIlflagging struggle against apartheid in that "beloved country" extolled by the poet. 156. Thus Pretoria has sunk to a new level in its avowed struggle to destroy international order based on Justice and equity and tL replace it with fascism and nazism. 157. It will doubtless achieve its aims if in the diligent work we have to carry out in order to do away with that scourge we hide behind selfish considerations of national interest. 158. Any agreement on Namibia will be worthless unless it takes account of the basic aspirations of the Namibian people. Despite blind repression, that people has proved its unity. It will not negotiate its right to self-determination and independence; it will not overthrow South Africa's absurd domination merely to place itself under the heel of a puppet government. Th~ Namibian people is at one with the United Nations and the OAU in demanding that·any agreement on its future reflect the conditions set forth by the OAU for its total and defnl'itive decolonization- namely: withdrawal of the administration and of all military and paramilitary forces from its territory; the unconditional liberation of all political prisoners and detainees and the return of all Namibian exiles and refugees; the approval by the United Nations Council for Namibia of the nomination of any authority in the Territory prior to independence; and the Territory's ac- cession to independence in strict respect for its integrity, including Walvis Bay. "I am a loyal Namibian, and 1 could not hand my people over.- to its enemies. I admit having decided to aid those who had taken up arms. 1 know that the struggle will be long and hard. 1 know also that my people will carry on that struggle, at all costs. Only when we have achieved independence will we stop fighting" Only VYhen we have regained'our human dignity on an equal footing with the whites will we be at peace with them." 161. Next week, on 27 October, there will be many manifestations of solidarity with the Namibian people. May this year mark the end of the Calvary and suff~rings of that people thanks to the decisive actions of our Organization against thO&; who have based their policies on contempt a.:'1d hatred. and' who would destroy our civilization by pushing us into the infernal cycle of fire and blood.. 162. To achieve that end, our Assembly must, at the end of this important debate, take firm decisions against the ap.artheid regime. The general consensus on the need to eliminate that scourge from our society makes that impera- tive. The Assembly should thus declare a total embargo against the partisans of that iniquitous system of govern- ment. That is the only way of shaking it to its foundations. 163. That is the price of the liberation of Namibia and of South Africa.

My delegation is particularly glad of the opportunity to speak in this debate in the Assembly on Namibia, for in our view, the situation in Namibia has become intolerable. The racist regime in South Africa, in an effort to prolong its illegal occupation of the country, has unleashed a campaign of terror and repression that now engulfs the whole of Namibia. Indeed, it maintains its hold upon Namibia by. carrying .out aggressior.. against that country's neighbours. TIi.e racist regime's attacks on Angola in particular now threaten the peace and security in the southern African region. 165. We cannot permit this situation to continue. The United Nations has unique obligations towards the people of Namibia. It is the legal authority in that Territory. The Charter obligations of Member States make it incumbent upon us to exert every effort to assist the Narnibian people in achieving their freedom and independence. We must also recognize that the racist regime in South Africa threatens peace and security in the region and act accordingly. 166. The situation in Namibia is not only intolerable but also exceedingly dangerous. If we turn a blind eye to what is happening in Namibia, we will be failing in our obligations to the peoples of southern Africa. What is 167. The United Nations has the authority to resolve the crisis in Namibia, and, in the view of my delegation, it could mobilize the power needed to accomplish that task. The United Nations could put an end to the racist regime's illegal occupation of Namibia and ensure the transfer of authority to the true representatives of the Namibian people.. 168. However, the United Nations has been frustrated in its efforts to carry out its obligations in Namibia by the shady manoeuvrings of certain Powers that seek to prevent real change there. These Powers apparently beUeve that they have a vital interest in maintaining "stability" in southern Africa-with majority rule, perhaps, but a majo- rity rule of a "reformed apartheid system". They have therefore done everything in their power to impede United Nations action on the question of Namibia. They have shamelessly misused the veto in the Security Council; they have usurped the authority of the Security Council; they have bypassed SWAPO in seeking to shape a so-called "settlement" with South Africa; and they are now asking for more time for negotiations that have achieved nothing for the people of Namibia 169. My delegation believes that the time has come to clear the air. Those perverse manoeuvres are now obstruc- ting the solution for which the people of N~nibia have been so valiantly fighting. We must not allow that to happen. We must not allow SWAPO, the Council for Namibia or the Security Council itself to be trodden on and pushed aside. We must not permit negotiations about Namibia, conducted by self-seeking outsiders with the racist regime in South Africa, to be shrouded in a cloak of secrecy. My delegation hopes, therefore, that the General Assembly will now proceed to a complete and critical examination of the real issues. We are sure that delegations will not be dissuaded from doing so by the vague assurances and pleas for time of outside Powers predisposed towards South Africa. 170. Africa cannot be free and independent so long as racism and colonialism maintain their evil grip on southern Africa. Southern Africa is an important and integral part of our continent. It is rich in resources and could furnish abundant supplies of food for regions that are less well endowed. It contains the only large industrial base in Africa. It has an extraordinary potential both for its own peoples and for other peoples of Africa. 171. None of that potential can be realized at the present moment. The peoples of southern Africa are trapped in an exploitative and inhuman racist system. The wealth ~d talent of the region are exploited almost exclusively for the benefit of the racist white minority and the transnational corporations. Apartheid is a deformation of history and a unique ugly system of constitutional racism and systematic oppression, which African cannot and will not tolerate. We question w4y the community of nations tolerates it. 172. This is particuiarly true in the case of !'iamibia. The racist white minority regime of South Africa occupies 173. It is imperative, therefore, that the Assembly cut through the self-serving arguments of certain Powers at this time, for these arguments seek to hide the reality of what is happening in Namibia and the reality of what is being tolerated. My delegation believes that, when the Assembly has considered the situation in Namibia today, it will.want to recommend that the Security Council take urgent and immediate action to end the illegal occupation of Namibia. 174. It is important to emphasize that the Namibian issue is not simply one of human rights and of ending colo- nialism, nor is it simply a question of the Charter obligations of States. It is also one of international peace and security. It is this aspect of the question that makes it imperative that the Assembly and the Security Council act with all speed, for Namibia is a country at war. The racist white minority regime has sent tens ofthousands of troops and police into the country in order to suppress the spreading rebellion against its illegal occupation. The northern part of the country has been placed under martial law. An attempt is being made to seal the frontier with Angola and to create a "free fue" zone. There are constant clashes between the guerrillas of the People's Liberation Army, the armed wing of SWAPO and the South Mrican security forces. Military operations are being mounted against the civilian population. Those who actively- oppoSe- . South African rule are being hunted down like animals, gaoled and tortured. 175. Namibia has already been used once as a base for the invasion of Angola, and it is well known that during the 1975 invasion of Angola the racist regime in South Africa was aided and abetted by many of its powerful allies. There is a grave dan:ger that, as the racist regime fmds itself increasingly pressed in Namibia, as the People's Liberation Army wins one success after another, the racist regime will seek to escalate the war in Namibia to mount a large-scale attack on Angola and also perhaps on Zambia. 176. The only way to avoid these dangers at this stage is to ensure that there is immediate and conzerted inter- national action to end once and for all the illegal occupation of Namibia. 177. It is being said in some quarters that the question of Namibian independence h~ been resolved. Certain mem- bers of the Security Council have been conducting nego- tiations with the racist regime in South Africa.for more than six months in an effort to find an internationally acceptable settlement for Namibia. These negotiations were not authorized by the Security Council. SWAPO was not invited to participate in' them. It was merely advised of the 178. My delegation is aware of the terms of the agreement which has been reached in these negotiations. We regard the agreement as a sham and a delusion. The negotiations have merely given the racist regime time in which to fragment Namibia furllier and to consolidate its1Ule there. The only substantive outcome of the negotiations, so far as we can see, is to make clear once again that the racist regime has failed to comply....as was already clear dUring the Security Council debates on Namibia at the end of 1976-with the terms of Security Council resolution 385 (1976), a reso- lution which was adopted unanimously ~ 179. It is therefore clear that the Security Council should now take action against the racist white minority in South Africa in order to enforce compliance with the terms of its resolution. 180. Before proceeding to make specific recommen- dations, the Libyan delegation believes it would be useful to place the present situation in perspective and, in particular, to examine the way in which the present proposals for Namibian independence have evolved. 181.. In 1976 the racist regime had elaborated a plan which was presented as a genuine effort to lead Namibia to independence. This plan emerged from the deliberations of a so-called constitutional conference held at the Tumhalle in Windhoek under the sponsorship and at the behest of the so-called Government of the racist regime. The participants in the Tumhalle conference were, for the most part, tribal 'officials, paid servants and sympathizers of the racist regime. Their plan consisted essentially of installing a multiracial government in Namibia under leaders chosen by the racist regime, producing a constitution and declaring independence by the end of 1978. 182. The entire scheme was based upon the racist and inhuman system of apar·theid. The population was to be divided into ethnic groups for administrative purposes. The whole system of government proposed was to be based on the bantustans. South African forces were to continue to occupy the Territory. The racist South African regime's administrative system was to remain in place and the economy was to rer.:ain in the hands of the white community and the transnational corporations. The only prOVisions for human rights were farcical, and there were no provisions for elections or popular participation in the bantustans or the central government. In short, the racist !6gimo in South Africa was scheming to install a client government which would have had very few of the attributes of indepcndem:e:, 183. Thu$, the plans announced by the racist regime in August of last year were Widely seen as fraudulent and treacherous. They propo~d merely to create the ap- pearance of independence while the white minority regime retained control of Namibia politically, economieally and militarily. 185. It was made clear in the Security Council debate on Namibia at the end of last year that the Tumhalle proposals could not possibly be construed as bringing the racist regime into compliance with the terms of Security Council resolution 385 (1976). And for that reason members of the SeCH!Uy Council introduced a further draft resolution calJhlg for a mandatory arms embargo against the racist re'~me.s Three permanent members of the Council cast a vet~) when that drdft resolution was voted upon. 186. The proceedings of the Security Council were then suspended with the clear understanding that the question of Namibia would soon be taken up again. The Security Council remained, and remains, seized of the matter. 187. Consideration of the crisis in Namibia, however, was postponed, and in the spring of this year the fIVe Western members of the Security Council announced that they were entering into negotiations with i!he racist regime of South Africa directly in order to try to fmd an internationally acceptable settlement. The Western members gave as- surances at the time that they were seeking a settlement which would end the bantustan system, ensure the with- drawal of South Afritan forces and prOVide for free elections under United Nations supervision and control. 188. So far as the Libyan delegation is concerned, it was clear from the beginning that this effort was doomed to failure. For the racist minority regime, Namibia is a possession of great consequence. There are many South African whites living in Namibia. The racist regime has important economic interests in the Territory. And, what is more relevant in the present context, the occupation of Namibia enables the racist regime to defend itself against the liberation movements more than a thousand miles to the north of Cape Province. The racist regime has shown itself willing to make some trivial and unimportant con- cessions in Namibia, but it is clearly determined to remain in controlthere. 189. Consequently, we never expeete<fthese negotiations to produce any honest results which would be satisfactory to the people of Namibia. For the Namibian people want an end to the racist regime's controL 190. 'vVhat have the recent negotiations actually pro- duced? Virtually nothing. The latest proposals do not provide for the withdrawal of the regime's forces from the country. Although the racist regime apparently agreed to some kind of"phased withdrawal", it has made it clear that 191. Thus the racist regime is proposing to maintain a strong mllitary presence in northern Namibia. In addition, it has a major air base and a naval base in Walvis Bay over which it now claims control. It is thus clear that, despite the so-called withdrawal, it will have literally tens of thousands of troops within two hours of any point in Namibia if it gets its way. 192. Moreover, the racist regime is proposing to limit the United Nations presence in Namibia during the transition period to a number which is altogettler inadequate. A United Nations force of military observers could not in any way begin to neutralize the racist regime's forces in Namibia, let alone the police. The numbers proposed are too small, and the racist regime has refused to allow in organized military units. The force of "military obser- vance" which has been proposed could thus not ensure the security needed for the United Nations supervision and control specified in Security Council resolution 385 (1976). 193. This also applies to the civilian forces to which the racist regime has agreed. There has been agreement that a representative of the Secretary-General will go to Namibia with some staff. Again, however, the numbers proposed reduce the potential effectiveness of that staff to almost nothing. The racist regime has 20,000 administrators in Namibia. It controls the commw~ications system, the transport network, the police, the generation of power, everything. How could a Vnited Nations administrative staff of a few hundred possibly ensure United Nations supervision and control of elections in such circumstances. It would take in excess of 1,000 men and women even to . provide a single United Nations official at all the polling places needed in a Territory of more than 300,000 square miles. Thus it is clear that the limit placed on Ullited Nations administrative personnel would make it impossible for the United Nations to carry out the functions which the Security Council would assign to it. 194. We must ask what such proposals really mean. These are not proposals for a settlement in Namibia. They would not create the conditions for independence and self- detemtination. They simply provide a new formula for the maintenance ofapartheid and the perpetuation of the racist regime's power. 195. tor what the racist regime is proposing, in fact, is that the United Nations and SWAPO agree to the transfer of power by elections which would be totally fraudulent. The racist regime controls Namibia now. If it maintains large numbers of troops and police in the Territory, if it controls the courts and the entire system of administration, will SWAPO have a chance in any elections? The racist regime continues to back the Turnhalle. That gang has now constituted itself a political party. The Fascist Tumhalle constitution ;cS its election manifesto. The Tumha!le gang is receiving funds from the multinational corporations; it has 197. It is not a new trick But it is surprisingly crude. A year ago the racist regime sought to appoint a puppet government in Namibia. Now it proposes to elect one. 198. Can anyone really take these proposals seriously? Is it really expected that the United Nations will put a stamp of approval on such proposals? Do the racist white minority and its lackeys think that we are blind? 199. This is not simply a matter of fraud. The racist regime and its accomplices are proposirig that the United Nations should participate in this crode and shoddy manoeuvre. They propose a small and ineffectual United Nations presence in the transition period, a presence which would make it impossible even to supervise much less to control any elections. They know that a few hundred United Nations officials can do almost nothing in such a situation. Why, then, do they want them there at all? The answer clearly is that the United Nations presence would lend some legitimacy to this insufferable farce. 200. The delegation of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya insists that this cannot even be considered. The proposals for a United Nations presence show what the racist regime really wants, that is, the continuation of its illegm and inhuman control in Namibia. A puppet constituent assembly legiti- mized by the United Nations wouId serve the ~~se admirably. 201. Thus it is clear that those proposals are merely an extension of the racist regime's war against the Namibian people and are meant to defeat SW~\PO, the sole and authentic representative of the Namibian peopla.. There should be no doubt about the racist regime's evil intentions. Despite its apparent "reasonableness" in seeking negoti. tions that regime has no intention of leaving Namibia Jald no one can persuade it to leave Namibia by reasoned argument. 202. The racist regime's so-called Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Botha, recently told the press: "South Africa has agreed to do nothing which will jeopardize the maintenance of law and order and the safety and security of the Territory." He said that the Govenunent still held the view that it was of crucial importance to South West Africa and its peoples that the racist regime's troops should remain there for their safety. Mr. Botha's statements are the clearest possible interpretation of the meaning of the new proposals for a so-called "settlement" in Namibia. 204. In this respect the white minority in South Africa is the identical twin of the F~scist Zionists in occupied Palestine, wher~ the State fears the oppressed minorities and those who have been expelled from their homeland. And so,in order to protect themselves from their own contradictions, the Zionists, too, pursue an inhuman aggressive and expansionist foreign policy. They occupy neighbouring lands and subjugate the indigenous popu- lation. They .send waves of colonizers out to extend their defence perimeter and create faits accomplis. So they compound the contradictions and create an increasingly explosive situation. 205. The racist regime's proposals for a so-called "settle- ment" in Nanuoia are no solution to the Namibian problem. The Namibian people cannot and will not accePt continued occupation, nor wili they accept a puppet constituent assembly. They will continue their struggle until they are free. . 206. SWAPO stated last week that it insisted that the racist regime must withdraw all its forces from Nanuoia before other issues could be resolved. SWAPO made that very clear. Furthermore, it stated that, if that condition was not accepted and if the racist regime did not respect the territorial integrity of Namibia, it would have no alternative but to continue the armed liberation struggle in.Namibia to its logical conclusion. 207. My delegation whole-heartedly supports SWAPO as the ~le and authentic representative of the Nanuoian people. The Ubyan Arab JamaPJriya has stood in solidarity with SWAPO and has offered it every possible material assistan~e in the pursuit of its struggle to liberate Namibia from the Fascist racists occupying it. We will continue to do everything in our power to help our brother Namibians. We believ~, like SWAPO, that the present proposals are nothing but a deceitful sham. We will continue to support SWAPO in every possible way until the racist regime withdraws completely from Namibia and the Nanuoian people gain genuine freedom and independence.

Prompted by the feelings of friendship and solidarity that the Albanian people have for the Nanuoian people as well as for all t~e peoples which are struggling for their freedom, independence and social progress, the Albanian delegation would like to express the views of its Government on the question of NamIbia which is before the General Assembly now. 209. The Albanian people indignantly condemn the intol- erable situation that persists today in Nanuoia, where the racist regime of South Africa continues to maintain its 210. The obstinacy of the South African racists in maintaining their colonial domination in Namibia not only constitutes a flagrant violation of the rights of the Namibian people but is also. a challenge to all the peace-loving peoples of Africa and of the entire world who support the struggle of the Namibian people. 211. During this debate the representatives of many democratic and progressive countrief! of Africa and ofother continents have denounced the colonial. policy conducted by the Fascist Pretoria regUne, supporting their statements with facts. They '~ve justly stressed that a speedy end should be put to this policy to enable the Namibian people to realize their national aspirations and to eliminate one of the main vestiges of the former colonial system in Africa. 212. But we are also witnessing attempts on the part of imperialist Powers to reduce the debates on this very important.question to routine discussions ana to create the . false impression'that the Namibian problem can be resolved thanks to their diplomacy and to the goodwill of the Pretoria regime. The United States and other imperialist Powers indulge in demagogy and loudly proclaim the so-called moderation and the liberation of the South African Government in order to have us believe that the way to a solution of the problem of Namibia is now open and that, because of their preswre, the Pretoria reg~ewill soon be ready to grant independence to Namibia. 213. But events in Namibia give clear proof that the South African racists and the imperialist Powers are having recourse to every means to prevent the Namibian people from attaining the genuine independence of its country in conformity with its sovereign rights and national interests. As has been !'~vealed in the course of the debates in this Assembly, Soutl'1 Africa has no intention whatsoever ef renouncing its illegal domination of Namibia; quite on thl~ contrary, it is intensifying its barbarous oppression and exploitation of the Namibian people. The racist Pretoria regime continues its constant terror and genocide against the Namibian people; it is also applying the heinous policy of apartheid to Namibia. The war operations which the South African armed forces unceasingly undertake against thi} freedom fighters in Namibia, and the massive massacres of thousands of innocent persons and the plans for the bantustanization of the country unmask the intrigues and the plans concocted by the Vorster regime aimed at camouflaging its designs, and prove how dangerous it is to be duped by its lies as to its "goodwill" and its "desire" to arrive at a negotiated solution of the problem of Namibia. 214. To cope with their present difficulties, the South African racists are very much counting, as alway S, on the assistance and the support of their friends and protectors, the imperialist Powers, and above all the United States of America. American imperialism, for its part, is very much interested in saving the racist regimes in Africa, in main- taining South Africa's domination in Namibia, in order that it may be better able to serve its neo-colonialist interests in 215. The experience of past years and recent events confmn that the so-called mediation initiatives and the p~ans put forward by the United States of America and other imperialist Powers are aimed at preventing a just solution of the question ofNamibia and at the same time at helping the Pretoria racists to prolong their colonial domination. 216. The just and speedy solution of the problem of Namibia has now become even more complicated because of the growing rivalry of the two imperialist super-~owers, the United States of America and the Soviet Union, designed to split ilie region of South Africa and the entire African continent into zones of influence. 217. In order to compete with the American imperialists, the Soviet social imperialists are unceasingly spreading all manner of deceit with regard to their friendship towards peoples struggling against racism in southern Africa. On the pretext of providing assistance to the liberation movements of that region, they are attempting to establish a hold there and to gain neo-colonialist positions and privileg~s. 218. The racist Pretoria and Salisbury regimes are quite happy to see the two super-Powers sowing division and discord in Africa and provoking disputes between the_ African countries. They are trying and will.continue to try their utmost to benefit from this situation and to assure themselves of still more assistance and the support of the imperialist Powers as a quid pro quo for the services which they render them. 219. Despite all those hostile and dangerous activities of its enemies, the freedom-loving people of Namibia is continuing its courageous struggle to secure its free~om, independence and social emancipation. The development of events in Namibia confirms that people's resolve to inten- sify still further its resistance and anned struggle to vanquish its enemies and to foil all the manoeuvres of the South African racists of imper~ ancient and modem. 'The Namibian people is struggling for a just cause, and in this struggle it is benefiting from the support and the solidarity of fraternal African peoples and other peoples of the world who love freedom. 220. From its own experience, and that of the other African peoples, the Nariubian people is convinced that genuine fJ;'eedom does not come as a gift. It has undergone severe tests in its liberation struggle, but through this struggle it has become steeled and will be able to confrot£t any difficulty by its determination and its fIghting spirit. 222. The Albanian people, a sincere friend of the Nami- bian people and of all other African peoples, expresses its ardent desire and its conviction that the Namibian people, by continuing its national liberation struggle to" the end, will certainly rout the South African racists and frustrate all the plottiilg of its enemies. We are oonvinced that nothing can prevent the Namibian people from realizing its national aspiration, recovering its freedom and its independence, and becoming master of its destiny in a free and sov~reign homeland.

I shall now call on those represen- tatives who hava asked to exercise the right of reply.

My delegation has carefully studied the various statements made in this Assembly concerning the problem of Namibia and the right of its people to self-determination. We can fully subscribe to some of those statements-indeed, many of them-and to others less. 225. However, I cannot under any circumstance overlook the slanderous remarks made totally out of context about my COUlltry-as usual, it is superfluous to say-by the representative of the Gennan Democratic Republic. .It is perhaps no coincidence that almost alone among the non-Arab countries it is again this State-East Gennany, and not for the fust time-which has injected the name of the State of Israel into the debate on amatter which surely deserves the undivided attention of the Members of .the United Nations. 226. Being a Member of the United Nations does not mem forgetting the past. And may I be permitted to say that the family of nations, especially those to which European history of only 30 to 40 years ago is still a vivid and horrifying memory, should express shock and astonish- ment at the unwarranted vilification of Israel by the spokesmen of the East Gennan regime. 227. Is it not the height of cynicism that this regime, which has never lifted a fmger to help or to indemnify the victims of Nazi persecution, should now be among the fust to cast a stona at a country where the survivors of this persecution have fmally found a home and refuge? Moreover, by injecting into tius debate matters which have no bearing whatsoever on the problem of Namibia, the Gennan Democratic Republic has gravely harmed the cause which this Orgar.ization is trying to further. 228. World opinion and sympathy are of supreme impor- tance for the attainment of freedom by the people of Namibia as well as of Zimbabwe. This world opinion and sympathy should not be diverted or alienated by self- interested manoeuvres the whole purpose ofwhich is to win a round in the war of propaganda which is going on and on.

I now call on the representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization, who wishes to make a statement in reply.

I am really touched by the recent past. I do remember; I have lived through that war and the holocaust. But that somebody' from the Zionist regime, in Tel Aviv, which is perpetrating similar ,and more heinous crimes against my own people, should come here and remind the heroic people of the German Democratic Republic of what they are doing to forget the past and make others forget the past is an insult to this Assembly. 232. I am shocked to hear that the Tel Aviv regime is sympathetic to and supports the fight of the people under colonial rule, especially that of our brothers in Namibia. That sympathy has been manifested specifically by the supply of Uzi machine-guns, by nuclear co-operation and by a heinous .and unholy alliance between Pretoria and Tel Aviv.

A representative of Israel has misused the debate on age!1da item 91 to utter slanders against the anti-Fascist German State of the German Democratic Republic. He could not refute the fact that co-operation and trust exist between brael and the apartheid regime of southern Africa, for the details about that co-operation, already known to world public opinion, are too numerous and have been mentioned often enClUgh in the various bodies of the United Nations, including the important forum of the General Assembly. 234. Let me just remind the Assembly of the facts. For example, there was Vorster's visit to Israel in 1976, during which discassions were focusej on matters concerning the co-operation of the two countries in the military and, in particular, the nuclear fields. In this context I refer to the report of the Commission on Human Rights.6 This attitude of the ruling forces in Israel has been condemned in the relevant resolutions. May I be allowed just·to recall last year's resolution 31/7, paragraph 6 of which reads as ronows: "[The GeneralAssembly]... "Strongly condemns the collaboration in both nuclear .and military fields between the racist minority regime of South Africa and all countries, in particular ... Israel ... which. continue to supply that regime with nuclear and mHitary equipment· and technology, thus increasing its nuclear and military potential, and calls upon all Govern- ments, in particular ... Israel ... to refrain from ex- tending facilities, directly or indirectly; to the racist minority regime of South Africa enabling it to produce uranium, plutonium and other nuclear materials, reactors or military equipment". 6 See document E/CN.4/Sub.2/383. 236. Instead of declaring in a matter-of-fact way before this forum that Israel intends to end that co-operation, as it has been called upon to do time and again by the majority of States Members of this Organization, the speaker had the presumptjon to slander a State whose anti-Fascist character is known to the entire world. Fascism, together with all its roots, has been eradicated in the German Democratic Republic. A socialist S.tate has been built in which people of the Jewish creed also enjoy all their rights as equal citizens. That has been confirmed repeatedly in public statements py the Jewish communities in the German Democratic Republic. 237. The question now is why the representative of Israel has resorted to slander against the German Democratic Republic. The answer is easy to fmd. He does so because the German Democratic Republic, in keeping with its principled policy of peace and understanding, speaks out unhesitatingly against Israel's aggression in the Middle East and supports the just cause of the Arab peoples. Further- more, the statement made by an Israeli representative today is aimed at diverting attention from the main problem involved in this agenda item, namely, the crimes committed by the apartheid regime, and is therefore a new example of assistance to a regime· which is justly a target of the strongest world-wide condemnation because of its shameful actions, directed in particular against the people of Namibia. 238. May I also point to the fact that the Permanent Mission of the German Democratic Republic to the United Nations is headed by a German an~i-Fascist fighter who risked his life in the struggle against Hitler's fascism. My delegation is convinced that the representatives of States present here will draw their own conclusions from the conduct displayed today by a representative of Israel.

There are no more speakers on my list asking to"exercise their right of reply this evening. Does anybody wish to speak in exercise of his right of reply?

I did not intend to reply to the represenhtive of Israel at this meeting, because he is only repeating in a somewhat boring manner what has been said ~: the last session and at this session of the General Assembly. But I believe that it shocks us all to hear the representative of Israel speak of crimes being perpetrated, and I think that the representatives of Israel should be the last to speak about crimes which have been c'oJmmitted. When a per~n cannot defend himself, or defend his position, he cons- tantly resorts to a sort of yerbal "delirium" and to deceitful allegations. That is one of the characteristics of Israel and its representatives. When a State feels it is isolated in the international arena and that it is subject to the condemna- 241. Israel's ability to resort to violence and deceitful allegations has gained such scope that it has become expert at it, but Israel should draw its lessons from history and should ponder the end of the Nazi and Fascist racist regimes. Israel and South Africa cannot withstand the tide of history and the verdict of history. I hope that Israel wnI not ultimately accuse history of being anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist. 242. This is not a problem arising out of the accusations addressed to Israel because of its shameful attitude toward the problem of the Middle East and Palestine, which is somethL"lg that we shall deQ. with in the future. Rather, it is a very dangerous problem for the African continent and the Arab region, arising out of the alliance between South Africa and Israel. 243. Relations between South Africa and Israel are an established fact and this has put an end to the Israeli presence elsewhere in Afric'l I invite the Israeli represen- tative once again to reau the statements of Mrican representatives in the General Assembly who, together with others, have condemned Israel. The representative of Israel should do so if he cares to renounce his arrogance. .As for the allegations that he has repeated, everyone knows the true role played by Israel and its position vis-a-vis the recommendations and the resolutions of the United Nations relating the liberation of Africa and its peoples. 244. I understand the circumstances in which the Israeli delegation fmds itself, but that is its fate. I wish that the representative of Israel would not confme himself to exercising his right of reply but would contribute to the work of the session, in particular to our efforts to secure the independence of peoples which are not yet "indepen- dent-but we fmd only permanent silence on Israel's part. 245. The close co-op~ration between Israel and South Africa is not a mere strategic goal; it is, rather, part and parcel ofthe national security policy of both countries. 246. I shall not speak in detail of the undeclared alliance between Israel and South Africa or speak of the profes- sionals that Israel sends to fight against liberation move- ments, or the repeated visits between the two coun- tries-one of which was the recent visit to Israel of the Foreign Minister of South Africa which took place in great

I am not going to be drawn into an argument about the Middle East conflict concerning which there is too much on the agenda of the United Nations anyway; nor do I want to take up more of the time of representatives because the hour is late. However, let me say that we could all see-if we made the effort-the relevant trade figures. And if we took a look at the official publications of the IMF we would learn that the trade of the State of Israel with South Africa is less than 0.5 per cent of the total trade of South Africa, pnbably less than that of many Arab States-certainly less than some of the States which are investing millions and millions of dollars in South Mrican gold, and probably much less than the trade of certain Eastem European States which make use of triangular trade deals and forge trade and shipping docu- ments. 248. In concluding, let me just say that I am not going to discuss with the representative of Egypt the nature and history of fascism and nazism, granting him the expertise, because, after all, the President of Egypt was during the Second World War a well-known member of an official Nazi spy ring in Cairo.

I -:ishjust to remind the Assembly that the volume of trade llatween Tel Aviv and Pretoria increased tenfold between the years 1966 and 1974. If representatives wish, that can be checked in books. The meetingrose at 6.35 p.m. 7 See "Against South Mrican Policy" (Letter to the Editor), New Outlook, August 1977, p. 61.