A/35/PV.102 General Assembly

I call on the representative of the United Republic of Cameroon on a point of order. 2. Mr. AYAFOR (United Republic of Cameroon): The Assembly adjourned this morning in order to permit the Credentials Committee to examine and report to it on the illegal presence in this Hall of the racist South African delegation. We therefore for- mally move that the General Assembly decide not to hear the representative of South Africa before the report of the Credentials Committee has been dis- posed of by the Assembly. 3. The PRESIDENT: Members have heard the formal motion by, the representative of the United Republic of Cameroon. I shall put that motion to the vote. The motion was adopted by 1/3 votes to 23, with 1 abstention.

We shall now consider the report of the Credentials Committee. • Resumed from the 95th meeting. NEW YORK 5. It will be recalled that the General Assembly was obliged to adjourn the plenary meeting this morning when the presence of representatives of the delega- tion of South Africa in this Hall was challenged by the representative ofthe United Republic ofCameroon. According.y, at my request the Credentials Com- mittee held its meeting today. 6. I understand that, in view of the urgency involved, the Credentials Committee has decided that an oral report should be made to the General Assembly, on the understanding that the report will be distributed in all the languages tomorrow morning as document A/35/484/Add.2. 7. I now call on the Chairman of the Credentials Committee, Mr. Rodolfo Piza Escalante of Costa Rica to present the Committee's report. 8. Mr. PIZA ESCALANTE (Costa Rica) Chairman of the Credentials Committee (interpretation from Spanish): At the 102nd plenary meeting of the General Assembly this morning the presence of the delega- tion of South Africa in the Assembly was challenged, and the matter was referred immediately to the Cre- dentials Committee. 9. The Credentials Committee held an urgent meeting, the views of the various delegations were heard and it was clear from the discussion that there was no consensus on the matter submitted to the Committee; therefore it was necessary to hold a vote on whether the communication presented to the Assembly and before the Committee constituted valid credentials that would enable South Africa to partici- pate in the thirty-fifth session ofthe General Assembly. 10. By 6 votes to 1, with 2 abstentions, the Com- mittee decided to reject the credentials of the delega- tion of South Africa to the thirty-fifth session of the General Assembly. The Credentials .Comrnittee also decided that, in view of the urgency of the matter, the Chairman of the Committee should make an oral presentation of the report to the General Assembly and that the written report would be issued later as document A/35/484/ Add.2. 11. The Credentials Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of the third report of the Credentials Committee and proposes, therefore, the following draft resolution: "Approves the third report of the Credentials Commi -e." 12. The i KESIDENT: The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Credentials Committee as just re.ad out by the Chairman of that Committee. 18. These considerations are a matter of principle to us. They do not imply that our rejection of the poli- cies of apartheid by the Government of South Africa is in question. Neither does it mean that our con- viction that the illegal occupation of Namibia by South Africa must cease has become less strong.

My delegation cannot but deplore the deci- sion just taken by the Assembly with regard to the representation of South Africa, a full-fledged Member of the Organization. The Credentials Committee and the Assembly itself have exceeded their authority by refusing to accept the credentials which has been legally submitted by that Government. That was tan- tamount to denying to a Member State the exercise of its fundamental rights and privileges, one of the basic principles of the Charter, which governs us all. 20. We continue to attach the greatest importance to the principles of universality and strict adherence to the. distribution of powers between the Security Council and the General Assembly as provided for in the Charter, particularly in its Articles 5 and 6. What has just been decided is in direct contradiction to those principles. 21. The question which was before us was not that of the nature of the regime in power in South Africa which we have always condemned; it was a purely technical question regarding the credentials of a dele- gation of a Member State which, quite clearly, were perfectly in order.

The negative vote Austria has just cast on the report of the Credentials Committee is based solely on the legal provisions of the Charter of the United Nations concerning the participation of Member States in the work of the 23. The Austrian Government has repeatedlv expressed its condem~ati,on. of the policy of apar;' he.u~ and of South Afnca s Illegal occupation of Na- ~lbJa. .on the ot~er ~an~, my Government firmly be- heves In the baSIC principle of ~he universality of the Un~ted Nations and it is for that reason that my dele- ganon voted for acceptance of the credentials of the South African delegation. 24. On the basis of rule 29 of' the rules of procedure my delegation voted against the motion of the repre: sentative of the United Republic of Cameroon. 25. Mr. KIRCA (Turkey): Turkey's position vis-a- vis the policies of apartheid of South Africa is well known and needs no reiteration here. We have made clear our total rejection of those racist policies in all the statements we have made as well as in all the votes we have so far cast in the Organization. 26. Therefore the positive vote we have just cast for the approval of the report of the Credentials Com- mittee and our positive vote on the motion of the ~nited Republic of Cameroon preceding it should be Interpreted strictly in the light of this sense of protest we feel at such policies of South Africa. 27. Mrs. KIRKPATRICK (United States of Ame- rica): The United States believes that South Africa's credentials should not be rejected and opposes the denial of South Africa's right to participate in the General Assembly. 28. The questions of procedure involved here have substantive implications of great import to the United Nations. In 1974 the United States made plain its strong opposition to the ruling of the General Assem- bly' whereby, by rejecting the credentials of the dele- gation of South Africa, the General Assembly had in effect decided to refuse to allow the South African delegation to participate in its work. 29. This afternoon the United States delegation reiterates its position. 3.0' Involved here. are the most fundamental ques- tions of membership and the rights of membership. The fact that South Africa's intention to resume its seat today was not known is irrelevant to the exer- cise of these reights. Neither is it relevant that South Africa is in arrears in the payment of its financial as- sessments. Only the Charter of the United Nations is relevant. The provisions and requirements of the Charter should be our only guide. 3I. Under the law of Articles 5 and 6 of the Charter a Member State may be suspended or expelled from the United Nations only upon the recommendation of the Security Council as confirmed by the General Assem?ly. Ye~ depriving a Member State of the right lo participate In the work of the only universal parlia- mentary organ of the United Nations is a principal ~onsequence of suspension and expulsion, and that IS also the consequence of denying a Stale the right to participate in the General Assembly. 34. No one has shown that South Africa's creden- tials fail to meet the requirements of the rules of pro- cedure. To refuse to consider those credentials as required by the rules is to use the guise of credentials to try to accomplish a suspension that lies beyond the powers of the General Assembly.

I now call on the represen- tative of Iceland, to speak on behalf of the Nordic countries. 36. Mr. T6MASSON (Iceland): On behalf of the Nordic countries-s-Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden and Iceland-I should like to state that our vote against approval of the third report of the Cre- dentials Committee is based on purely legal principles. 37. We wish to see all Members of the United Na- tions participating in and co-operating with the United Nations. The Nordic Governments have repeatedly expressed their condemnation of the policy of apart- heid and of South Africa's illegal occupation of Na- mibia. The question before the Committee, however, was whether the credentials under consideration ful- filled the requirements of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. In the view of our delegations, that was the case and to decide otherwise would be tantamount to suspension of membership, which, under Articles 5 and 6 of the Charter, requires a rec- ommendation of the Security Council and a decision of the Assembly. 38. The Nordic delegations strongly support the principle of the universality of the United Nations and, since the requirements of Articles 5 and 6 of the Charter have not been met, the credentials in ques- tion should therefore have been accepted.

My delegation is associated with the statement of the representative of the Netherlands, made on behalf of the 10 members of the European Community. 40. In addition, on behalf of the United Kingdom, I should like to make clear that my delegation does not consider that either the Credentials Committee or the General Assembly has the right to deprive a Mem- ber State of the rights of membership contained in the Charter. The Committee has rejected the credentials of the South African delegation for reasons which are not provided for in the rules of procedure of the Gen- eral Assembly or in the Charter. We were therefore obliged to vote against approval of their report. 41. My delegation attaches fundamental importance to the principle enshrined in Article 9 of the Charter, namely that the General Assembly shall consist of all the Members of the United Nations. 44. My delegation voted against that proposal. We believe that the representative of South Africa should have had the opportunity to speak, in accordance with the terms of rule 29 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. That rule states clearly that any representative tu whose admission a Member has made objection shall be seated provisionally with the same rights as other representatives until the Cre- dentials Committee has reported and the General Assembly has given its decision. 45. Mr. von STUDNITZ (Federal Republic of Ger- many): I should like to associate myself with the state- ment just made by the delegation of the, Netherlands on behalf of the European Community. 46. On behalf of my delegation, I should like to give the following additional explanation, to make it quite clear. My Government has no sympathy whatsoever with South Africa's policy ofapartheid and has always stated so in this Assembly. However, the question that the General Assembly had to decide was a matter of the application of the Charter and rules of proce- dure based on it. The question has been considered by the General Assembly on repeated occasions. My delegation has consistently-s-I refer to my delega- tion's statements of 12 November 1974,2 24 May 19793 and 13 October 1980 [35th meeting]-held the view, and does so today, that the competence of the Credentials Committee does not go beyond the rzht to examine the due form of the credentials sub .ed by any given Government. It is inconsistent ':le provisions of the Charter to evaluate the leg.. ...cy and the policies of Governments which issue such credentials. 47. It was on those grounds that my delegation voted against the approval of the report of the Cre- dentials Committee.

New Zealand was unable to accept the Credentials Committee's report on South Africa. New Zealand has always up- held the principle of universality and the right of all Member States to be heard. We do not believe that it is the function of the Credentials Committee to judge the legality of Governments; in our view its function is simply to determine whether credentials are in order. 49. Our vote on Ulis issue in no way detracts from New Zealand's firm rejection of the South African Government's racist policy of apartheid nor from New Zealand's opposition to South Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia.

On behalf of the French delegation. I should like to support what was said by the representative 2 lbid.. 228lst meeting. 52. We note that, in the absence of other provisions, the powers of the Credentials Committee are limited by the rules of procedure of the General Assembly to establishing the facts, that have nothing to do with the policies of the Government concerned. The Committee having rejected the credentials of a dele- gation for reasons not to be found in the rules of pro- cedure of the Assembly, we had no choice but to vote against the Committee's report. We feel that an orga- nization which does not respect its fundamental laws renders itself vulnerable. Any of its members could one day become victims of that weakness, whereas universality is the very foundation of the United Nations. 53. We understand and respect the feelings which, at past sessions and at this session, during the work of the Credentials Committee, have moved a number of delegations in denouncing the policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa. On many occa- sions, and very clearly, we have expressed our rejec- tion of the policies ofapartheid, We consider contrary to universal respect for human rights and fundamen- tal freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion, as required from Member States by the Charter, a policy that, on the pretext of separate development, establishes discrimination among men for ethnic reasons. 54. It is a matter of regret that South Africa was not given the opportunity to speak before the vote.

The vote that was just held was not on Namibia nor on the conduct of the Republic of South Africa; it was on the implementation of the legal norms in force in the Organization. We voted against the report of the Credentials Committee because we believe that it departs from the spirit and the letter of the Charter and because it is at variance with the principle of uni- versality of the United Nations. 56. In addition-although this was not a decisive factor in our decision-we believe that that vote will only further alienate world public opinion from our work. 57. We are sorry that in voting thus we have had to stray from the majority of the Latin American coun- tries and our friends from Asia and Africa, with many of which we share the firm repudiation of the illegal occupation of Namibia. We are also members of the United Nations Council for Namibia. But we firmly believe that the sole hope for respect for the small and medium-sized countries is support for the rule of law-and that was the principle which guided the delegation of Chile in the vote.

The Australian delegation voted against the proposition that South Africa should not be heard in the Assembly today and against approval of the report of the Credentials Committee. We did so on legal grounds and particu- 64. First, the delegation of Costa Rica has con- demned and continues vigorously to condemn both the illegal and inadmissible occupation of Namibia by South Africa and the racist and inhuman apartheid regime imposed by the minority on the indigenous majority in South Africa. For those two reasons, not only. have we voted in favour of all United Nations resolutions condemning that Government but we have in addition always advocated and we continue to advocate that the General Assembly and, above all, the Security Council should begin taking more effective measures aimed at putting and end both to the illegal occupation of Namibia and to the apartheid regime. 65. However, my delegation believes that with re- gard to the problem of the credentials of the South African delegation, due account must be taken of certain other important considerations. These con- siderations require that we draw a distinction be- tween two different situations. One is the legality or illegality of the delegation-and, in general, of the present Government of South Africa-in its repre- sentation of that country in the General Assembly; the other is the occupation of Namibia by the Gov- ernment of South Africa. 66. In the first case, there is the question of whether the present Government of South Africa should or should not participate in the activities of the General

The Assembly will now re- turn to the consideration of agenda item 27. 72. I call on the President of the United Nations Council for Namibia, Mr. Paul J. F. Lusaka of Zam- bia, to continue his statement. 73. Mr. LUSAKA President of the United Nations Council for Namibia: Mr. President, you have kindly said that you would like me to continue my state- ment. With your' indulgence and that of the General Assembly, I should like to start my statement again from the beginning. 74. However, first of all, I should like to say that I have been surprised by the amount of time spent on the procedural matter raised this morning. I would have thought that the General Assembly decision of 1974 on this matter would have been upheld; but, unfortunately, that has not been the case. 75. This session marks 35 years of the life of the Organization and during those 35 years many coun- tries have gained independence and have taken their rightful place among the community of nations as Members of the Organization. But for Namibia, which has remained on the agenda of the Assembly for 35 years, nothing has changed. Namibia remains dominated and illegally occupied by a foreign Power, South Africa. 79. At the thirty-fourth session, the General As- sembly, in resolution 34/92 B of 12 December 1979, declared that the exploitation of the natural resources of Namibia by foreign economic interests in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and also of the pertinent resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council and Decree No. I for the Pro- tection of the Natural Resources of Namibia, was illegal. By that resolution, the Assembly requested the Council for Namibia to look into the question of the exploitation of Namibian uranium and to report on its findings. 80. Many resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council have been adopted with similar pronouncements, as well as the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 19714 that, the presence of South Africa in Namibia having been de- clared illegal, all acts of South Africa in Namibia are illegal. 4 Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16. resolution 264 (1969) and paragraph 5 of resolu- tion 269 (1969), were adopted in conformity with the purposes and principles of the Charter and in accordance with its Articles 24 and 25". The Court emphasized that those decisions were consequently "binding on all States Members of the United Nations, which are thus under obligation to accept and carry them out". 82. Nevertheless, the regime in Pretoria has con- tinued to defy all the relevant resolutions of the United Nations on Namibia and the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, and it has stubbornly persisted in its illegal occupation of that Territory, with the implicit connivance of many Western States -Members of the Organization-which are engaged in trade and many other multifarious military and economic relations with South Africa. This is absurd and sinful. 83. We are therefore not surprised that South Africa has concocted other schemes such as the so-called Representative Authorities Proclamation (AG.8), which divides the people of Namibia into racially and tribally defined puppet entities which are controlled by the so-called Democratic Turnhalle Alliance [DTA], the Action Front for the Retention of Turn- halle Principles [AKTUR] and other ethnic quislings masqueraded by South Africa internal political par- ties in the Territory. It is through this figment of its imagination that South Africa has also labelled some structure the Council of Ministers and has arrogated unto that structure executive and administrative powers. Therein exists a conglomeration of political misfits which are constantly shepherded and paraded before the Western world as the real representatives of the people of the Territory. 84. Now what does this mean? It means that South Africa hopes through this machination to win sup- 85. At the beginning of the thirty-fifth session of the General Assembly, South Africa, through its puppet instrument Dirk Mudge, who is a member of the clandestine Broederbond and so-called chairman of the DTA, sought to participate in that session's de- bate solely as a ploy for recognition. I understand that last week he sent a similar request to the United Nations Secretariat, asking for an invitation to be extended to the DTA to participate in this debate on an equal footing with the South West Africa People's Organization [SWAPO]. Of course, Security Council resolution 439 (1978) would take care of that. In any case, that would be totally unacceptable because it is contrary to the many resolutions of the General Assembly, including the repeated policy position of the Assembly, which recognizes SWAPO as the sole and authentic representative of the peopie of Nami- bia. Only SWAPO has been accorded a standing invi- tation by the General Assembly to participate in the debate on Namibia. It is only SWAPO which, through the decision of the General Assembly, enjoys the status of Permanent Observer in the Organization. 86. South Africa must not be allowed through de- liberate misrepresentation, misinterpretation and innuendo to seek to gain recognition by the United Nations for its puppets, thereby subverting the proper and due recognition which SWAPO has appropriately earned by its legitimate struggle for freedom and genuine independence and with the blood and sweat of Namibian freedom fighters and many martyrs. 87. We must reject as unfounded the insistence on accusations of partiality directed against the Organi- zation by South Africa. 88. Let us constantly remain alert to all the rnanoeu- vres which Sout Africa is persistently employing not only against the people of Namibia but also against the Organization. The South African regime is today busy trying to perfect its well-known trickery in the art of political ventriloquism and political acrobatics -which means the skill of talking through a dummy and the art of the somersault. 89. It is almost three years now since South Africa gave the impression of having accepted the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia. But throughout this period South Africa has sought to introduce a number of elements that are not germane to the expressly stated purpose of the plan and has 91. Throughout this period of talks in which South Africa continued to play a political hide-and-seek game with all the parties concerned, SWAPO con- sistently exhibited rare qualities of statesmanship by making the necessary concessions which would have facilitated the speedy implementation of the United Nations plan. 92. Even in Geneva, during the pre-implementation talks on Namibia, the President of SWAPO, Mr. Sam Nujoma, declared publicly that his organization was ready to . 'gn a cease-fire agreement with South Africa. It IS South Africa which rejected that offer and deliberately caused the collapse of the Geneva talks on Namibia. 93. The United Nations Council for Namibia com- mends the Secretary-General of the United Nations and his staff. It also commends SWAPO, the Organi- zation of African Unity lOA U] and the front-line States and Nigeria for their patience, co-operation and steadfastness in this regard. 94. But South Africa, with its own misconceived illusions of racist grandeur, must never understand all these painstaking efforts which have gone into this exerci-e to mean that the international community is letting down its guard and relaxing the vigilance which it has always maintained. The international community and especially the five Western States -namely, Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, the United Kingdom and the United States- must either start or continue, as the case may be, to put more pressure on the South African regime to comply with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council on Namibia until the Territory is genuinely free and independent. Here, we must once more urge these Western countries which not only are trading partners and traditional allies of South Africa, but were also initiators of the ideas that ultimately culminated in the United Na- 95. The number of resolutions adopted on the sub- ject of southern Africa-that is, Namibia and South Africa itself-since 1960 gives expression to the con- cern that the United Nations has manifested in dealing with a small group of white racists, backed in action by the big, Western Powers, in their oppression of the black people. The big Western Powers are behind 3 million white people who are oppressing more than 20 million non-white people in Namibia and South Africa, because of their economic, mili- tary, strategic, ideological and political relations with South Africa. But in Namibia the United Nations must assert its authority as the legal Administering Authority until the genuine independence of that Territory. The United Nations resolutions must be implemented in spite of the measures being taken by the Pretoria regime to extend and consolidate apart- heid in Namibia. Namibia is the responsibility of the United Nations. 96. Many scholars and experts of varying degrees of international as well as academic repute have de- monstrated with facts and figures during the hearings on Namibian uranium how these Western Govern- ments-together with their multinational corpora- tions-are in concert with the racist regime of South Africa in the plunder of the resources of Namibia. Much more outrageous and chilling among the revela- tions which came out in the testimony of many wit- nesses was that concerning the stage which South Africa has reached in its nuclear capability attained through the illegal exploitation of the Namibian ura- nium resources, with the collaboration of multinatio- nal corporations, including those of some Western Governments. 97. How horrendous and grim it would be if it were to happen that the people of Namibia and their neigh- bours in the region became victims of an atomic weapon put into the hands of mad racist South Africa by Western technology. It is time that Western coun- tries which are collaborators of South Africa should see and acknowledge the danger which the Pretoria regime is rapidly posing to humanity in general and to the peoples of the southern African region in par- ticular. The verbatim transcripts of the hearings on Namibian uranium-embodying testimony of experts and scholars-have already been published as a document of the United Nations Council for Namibia. 98. The Council will also be submitting to the Gen- eral Assembly, as part of its report, summaries of that testimony together with our conclusions and rec- ommendations proposing a programme of action. I must put it to the General Assembly that a concerted effort by all of us is required, in the spirit of co-opera- tion, in order to demonstrate to the regime in Pretoria that we have come to the end of our tether over its vacillation on Namibia and a new programme of action to deal with the situation has become impera- tive. We must demonstrate to that intransigent regime that members of the international community are determined to act accordingly. 109. Mr. HELSKOV, Vice-Chairman of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Imple- mentation of the Declaration on the Granting of Inde- pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples: As the Vice-Chairman 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, I have the honour of introducing to the General Assembly chapter VIII of the report of the Special Committee covering its work during the year 1980[A/35/23/Rev.1] concerning the question of Namibia. 110. The report, which relates to agenda item 27, is submitted pursuant to paragraph 12 of resolution 34/94 of 13 December 1979 on the implementation of the Declaration, by which the General Assembly re- quested the Special Committee "to continue to seek suitable means for the immediate and full implemen- tation of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) in all Territories which have not yet attained indepen- dence and, in particular: ..... to formulate specific proposals for the elimination of the remaining mani- festations of colonialism and to fI port thereon to the General Assembly at its thirty-fifth session". 111. In continuing to perform the aforementioned tasks in relation to the question of Namibia, the Spe- cial Committee took into consideration the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly, particularly resolutions 34/92 A to G, as well as the relevant decisions of the Security Council and the United Nations Council for Namibia. 112. As will be noted from the report, during 1980 the Special Committee once again examined in depth developments relating to the question of Namibia with the active participation of the representatives OiL' the United Nations Council for Namibia and of SWAPO. 113. In its consensus, adopted in August last year, the Special Committee called the attention of the international community to the extremely serious situation prevailing in Namibia as a result of the con- tinuing manoeuvres by the occupying regime of South Africa to perpetuate its illegal domination of the Ter- 118. In reiterating that the only political solution for Namibia should be one based on the termination of South Africa's illegal occupation, the withdrawal of its armed forces and the free and unfettered exer- cise by all the Namibian people of their right to self- determination and independence within a united Na- mibia, in accordance with General Assembly resolu- tion 1514 (XV), the Committee reaffirmed the need to hold free elections under the supervision and con- trol of the United Nations in the whole of Namibia as one political entity, in accordance with Security Council resolution 385 (1976). The Committee further reaffirmed its support for the people of the Territory and their national liberation movement SWAPO, and appealed to all Member States to grant SWAPO all necessary support and assistance in its struggle to achieve independence and national unity in a free Namibia. 119. The Special Committee condemned South Africa for its military build-up in Namibia and its ille- gal use of Namibia for acts of aggression against independent African countries. Finally, the Special Committee recommended that the Security Council consider imposing comprehensive and mandatory sanctions against South Africa under Chapter VII of 128. SWAPO was manifestly opposed to the post- ponement of the debate. We struck a note of caution. We stressed the fact that there was no evidence what- soever of racist South Africa's having committed itself to co-operating with the United Nations in the search for an agreement leading to a negotiated or peaceful settlement of the thorny problem of Namibia. SWAPO was convinced that the Boer regime was resorting to its customary sinister political chicanery with a view to delaying further the implementation of Security Council resolutions 435 (1978) and 439 (1978). This much was unmistakably clear to us. 129. As people who are dealing daily on the spot inside Namibia with the racist usurpers and terrorists, we have grown accustomed to their bad faith and die- hard mentality. The fact of the matter is that the bloodthirsty fascist, illegal regime is digging its me- nacing heels more and more into the ground in Nami- bia in order further to entrench the illegal occupation, colonial oppression and exploitation of our country. 130. I do not wish to labour the point more than necessary, because I do not delight in saying "We told you so". But I must stress that it is the succes- sive Afrikaner regimes and the white settler minority racist clique which have invited the wrath of the world community upon themselves. They cannot blame anybody else for that. Nothing good has ever been said about the policies and practices of the non- representative minority regime of South Africa-in the United Nations or in various other international bodies. It is a country whose apartheid system has been condemned as a crime against humanity and whose regime has been dismissed as an illegitimate one. 131. In respect of Namibia, the record speaks for itself. Throughout the 35 years of the United Nations efforts to rid Namibia of foreign colonial domination, oppression and exploitation, every single one of these criminal Hoer regimes has adopted an obstructionist policy of defiance and rejection of all the resolutions and decisions of the Organization. The Present Botha regime is no exception to the intransigence and pre- varications characteristic of the Afrikaner Fascist authorities. 132. Today, in shameless disregard for honesty, the Pretoria racist mafia is trying to fool the whole world by twisting facts and shifting the blame somewhere else, especially on to the United Nations, for allegedly holding-up Namibia's independence. And, ironically, this diatribe and the distortions emanating from Pre- toria enjoy sympathetic, if not encouraging, coverate in the mass media of the major capitalist countries. There is absolutely no element of truth in the empty yelling of the racist international outlaws. South Africa has no case whatsoever regarding Namibia. The repeated demand of the international community is for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of South Africa's illegal, racist colonial Administration from Namibia. b Ibid., Thirty-sixth Year, Supplement for January, Fehruary IIlId March 198/. document S/l4333. ..It follows also that the international community is left with no other choice than to continue to render all-round support and assistance to the Na- mibian patriots, whc :are resisting the illegal occu- pation and colonial oppression in Namibia. "To this end the United Nations has a unique and special responsibility for Namibia and its people to ensure that geniune independence is achieved in the Territory. On this basis, the General Assembly must, during its forthcoming resumed session, make appropriate recommendations on Namibia to the Security Council. The Security Council should once again be called upon, as a matter of urgency, to impose comprehensive mandatory sanctions, including an oil embargo, on South Africa in order to compel the Pretoria regime to re- linquish its illegal and oppressive occupation of Namibia." 144. Similarly, in a joint press statement of 14Janu- ary 1981 the front-line States, Nigeria and the OAU, echoing our position, declared: "From the outset it must be emphasized that this meeting"-that is, the meeting at Geneva-" is the direct consequence of the successful armed liberation struggle being waged by SWAPO. There- fore, if SWAPO agreed to attend the Geneva meeting, it was because they had hoped for results which are going to be achieved after the completion of the ongoing armed struggle. Throughout that struggle, Africa has always been and continues to be behind SWAPO. On behalf of the independent African States, we take this opportunity to pay a special tribute to the gallant fighters of SWAPO for the successes scored on the battlefield that have made this conference possible." The statement continued: .. SWAPO declared during this meeting their readiness to sign a cease-fire agreement and to reach agreement on the date for the implementation of the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia. South Africa, on the other hand, has characteristically exhibited its usual obstinacy and intransigence by rejecting the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia. From the be- ginning it was clear to the front-line States, Nigeria and the OAU that South Africa was stalling for time by diverting this conference from discussing its main objective, the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). It was clear from the beginning that South Africa was here to wreck the meeting by provoking SWAPO through the most intemperate and sometimes outright crude lan- guage used by certain members of the South Afri- can delegation. The SWAPO leadership demon- strated to the world their statesmanship by refusing 146. This, then, is SWAPO's and Africa's call for action. This is what we have now brought before the Assembly for endorsement. 147. Although it is true that the problem of Namibia is close ,t to the hearts of all the peoples of Africa, it is equally true that it is an international problem; it is a problem which should affect all of humanity. It follows therefore that there was world-wide reaction and anger at what transpired at Geneva. As would be expected, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Non- Aligned Countries responded constructively and unequivocally in the Declaration issued at their New Delhi Conference. It joined in Africa's call for puni- tive measures against the illegal, racist colonial re- gime of South Africa in order to force that regime immediately and unconditionnaly to vacate Namibia. It firmly stood behind SWAPO. The Movement has also decided to set up a Namibian solidarity fund to 149. In our view, the crowning act is manifested in the strong position of the Council of Ministers of the OAU whose thirty-sixth session has just concluded' its meeting at Addid Ababa and adopted yet another resolution on Namibia. In that resolution the Minis- ters condemned South Africa, denounced the West- ern "contact group" for its recalcitrance and con- nivance with the racists and for its apparent unwil- lingness to exert concerted pressure on racist South Africa. The Ministers also once again expressed complete solidarity with SWAPO and reiterated the total commitment of the OAU member States to in- creasing material, military, financial, political and diplomatic support to the heroic people of Namibia, through SWAPO, their sole and authentic represen- tati .e, in order to intensify further the armed struggle in Namibia. 150. The question before the resumed session of the General Assembly is whether the international com- munity can now demonstrate the courage of its con- victions by drawing the line here. It is, in our view, a matter of urgency for the Assembly to adopt unani- mously a clear and categorical position representing the awareness of the world community that enough is enough and that what is called for is the total mobi- lization of all resources, as was done against nazism, to end the racist colonial oppression and illegal occu- pation of Namibia by the neo-Hitlerites of South Africa. The Assembly should once again urge the Security Council to apply a all economic. ..,...nctions, including a total oil embargo, against racist South Africa, as recommended by the OAU, the non-aligned movement, and the United Nations Council for Namibia. 151. We foresee difficult days ahead of us; we expect vicious and massive military attacks and political repression from the enemy; our people will be sub- jected to a renewed terror campaign of arbitrary arrests, incarceration, torture and killings. Right now numerous Namibia! youth and students are being conscripted at gun-point into the Fascist, colonial army of the occupation regime to fight their fellow Namibian patriots of the People's Liberation Army of Namibia. Yes, they will certainly endure increased sufferings and make the supreme sacrifice. The Presi- dent of SWAPO raised a question in Geneva: At what cost must Namibia win freedom? The Namibian natri ,.) and combatants have taken up arms to free l-la'T.Jbia. The United Nations, wh'ch has assumed a unique and special responsibility ior Namibia and its people until independence, must also now answer that question, not merely in wo, ds but through action. 152. This is the first time s. _ej\he unanimous elec- tion of Mr. von Wechmar to the presidency that I have spoken in the General Assembly. May I at this time extend to him our sincere congratulations and offer 153. The brilliant election of Mr. Salim A. Salim of the United Republic of Tanzania as President of the thirty-fourth session of the General Assembly was a source of great pride and satisfaction to us. His stew- ardship of the Assembly was outstanding and inno- vative. We are proud of his memorable contribution and remain convinced that Africa's prestige has thereby been greatly enhanced. While he is now serving his beloved country as its Foreign Minister, Africa as a whole would like to see him playing a pro- minent role one day in the wider context of interna- tional affairs. 154. Nearly four years ago a diplomatic initiative of the Western "contact group" was launched amidst lofty words and political fanfare. It was advertised as an alternative to the intensification of the reactionary violence versus armed struggle in Namibia in par- ticular and southern Africa in general. It was also stressed that the "contact group", using collectively the enormous influence and leverage that the major Western trading partners of South Africa have over that regime, would be able to prevail over South Africa to accept and comply with the United Nations reso- lutions and decisions on Namibia. 155. We were thus manipulated and urged not to insist on calling for the application of economic sanc- tions and an oil embargo against the Pretoria regime until the Western initiative had taken its course. It was said that our frustrations and impatience were justified, unterstood and shared, but that we should try to extend the zone of patience a bit further. 156. SWAPO, Africa, the United Nations and the rest of peace-loving mankind agreed after much re- flection and when the countries concerned had re- peatedly iterated and reiterated their bona fide inten- tion to deliver us from the Boer regime. 157. The events on that score since the spring of 1977 are a matter of record and are well known to the representatives and the United Nations Secretariat. If we could put a price on the loss of human lives and destruction of property during that period, it would run into trillions of dollars. But, then, how can we quantity the value of human lives? We are still busy trying to put a price-tag on the systematic decimation of the Namibian population by the brutal colonial forces of imperial Germany. But, even so, can we bring the dead back to life? 158. The fact of the matter is that Namibia is not yet free. The promises and assurances given in the spring of 1977 have proved to be fraudulent and dishonest. How else can we interpret the obvious recalcitrance of the so-called contact group, which cont.inues to pretend that it is completely helpless in the face of Pretoria's continued defiance .ntransigence and hostility towards the international community. 159. SWAPO knew very well and put it on record before the Western Powers that their economic and strategic interests, huge investments and other finan- :ial concerns and military arrangements in southern Africa constituted too profitable a real estate, yielding 164. The challenge posed by racist South Africa to the international community is really a challenge to the Western "contact group". If they felt four years ago that our demands then for the application of total economic sanctions against South Africa were pre- mature, now we expect them to take the lead in calling for sanctions against the defiant, criminal regime of South Africa or to support such a call without any hesitation or excuses. 165. We do not expect the Assembly at this session to waste time on irrelevant issues and preposterous demands made at Geneva by the delegation of South Africa or the latest public relations charade here by that very same racist country. South Africa is alone responsible for the situation in Namibia and cannot, through sinister schemes and dilatory manoeuvres hope to devolve that responsibility on its puppets and local racist agents of the so-called National Assem- bly or the bogus Council of Ministers. Nor do we 169. It is therefore my sincere hope that the As- sembly will act on the basis of all those recommen- dations in terms of its own work and in connexion with those actions and decisions that it must recom- mend to the Security Council in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. 170. Before concluding, I should like on behalf of SWAPO and in the name of the entire people of Na- mibia to extend to Mr. Kurt Waldheim our goodwill and our appreciation for his tireless efforts to expedite the decolonization of Namibia. We are most grateful to him for the co-operation and courtesy that we have always received from him and his colleagues. I wish to reassure him that we remain ready to co-operate with the United Nations in our common search to implement United Nations resolutions. 171. Finally, I shall merely repeat what our national leader has said: that the struggle continues until final victory. We have no other choice but to intensify the armed liberation struggle and we therefore expect generous and all-round support and assistance from the world community. May we add our voice to the harmonious chorus of peace-loving, progressive and justice-upholding mankind in appealing for effective assistance for the front-line States whose selfless support for the cause of liberation in southern Africa has made them targets of unprovoked military attacks 179. In the view of the delegation of Panama, the draft resolution recommended by the United Nations Council for Namibia, with a few stylistic changes that may be necessary, should command the support of the General Assembly-if not of all the members, then surely of an overwhelming majority. The draft resolutions to which I have referred describe thor- oughly and accurately the situation prevailing in Namibia as a result of the illegal occupation of the Ter- ritory by South Africa; the intensification and co- ordination of United Nations actions in support of Namibia; the programme of work of the United Na- tions Council for Namibia; the action of the intergov- ernmental and non-governmental organizations in connexion with Namibia; the support for the United Nations Institute for Namibia; the activities con- nected with the Nationhood Programme for Namibia; the United Nations Fund for Namibia; the dissemina- tion of information on Namibia; the International Conference in Support of the Struggle of the People of Namibia for Independence; the question of Nami- bian uranium; and the situation resulting from South Africa's refusal to comply with United Nations reso- lutions on Namibia. 180. Nevertheless, we believe that the debate on this question must focus particularly on consider- ation of the situation produced by South Africa's having caused the failure of the Geneva meeting held from 7 to 14 January 1981. The central purpose of that meeting was to achieve a firm agreement on the date of a cease-fire and the beginning of the imple- mentation of the plan proposed for the independence of Namibia before the end of i 981, in accordance with resolution 435 (1978) adopted by the Security Council as a result of the negotiations of the five Western States members of the Security Council in 1978-that is, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Canada and the Federal Republic of Germany- together with the front-line States; Angola, Bot- swana, Zambia, Mozambique and the United Re- public of Tanzania; as well as the two main parties, the Government of South Africa and SWAPO. 181. In that connexion, it should be pointed out that the Government of Panama maintains its offer of a 183. In the face of the delinquent attitude of South Africa, an attitude of open rebellion towards deci- sions of the General Assembly, the Security Council and the International Court of Justice, the Govern- ment of Panama believes that the General Assembly must adopt the measures required by the existing serious situation in southern Africa, taking into account the following elements: First, Namibia is the direct responsibility of the United Nations; its occupation by South Africa is illegal. Secondly, the United Nations is duty bound to ensure self-determi- nation, freedom and national independence in Na- mibia. Thirdly, there can be no doubt about, or viola- tion in any way of, respect for the territorial integrity of Namibia, which includes Walvis Bay, the Penguin Islands and other islands facing the coast. Fourthly, the United Nations Council for Namibia, as the Admin- istering Authority of the Territory until independence, must promote and strengthen its co-operation with the non-governmental organizations supporting the liberation struggle of the Namibian people. under the leadership of SWAPO, its sole and authentic repre- sentative. 184. The international community cannot recognize and must reject any assembly, administration or entity established at Windhoek that is not the result of free elections in Namibia held under the supervi- sion and control of the United Nations. The interna- tional community must recognize, as does my Gov- ernment, the constructive support of SWAPO in the search for peaceful formulas to solve the problem. 185. My Government also commends the positive activities, the patience, the spirit of understanding and the high sense of ethics of the African leaders, who showed extraordinary restraint in Geneva in the face of the desperate South African provocations. We commend the front-line States and Nigeria, as observers at the Geneva meeting, for their valuable and intelligent contribution. 186. Today more than ever we can see the urgent need for the Western States that are permanent mem- bers of the Security Council, and that have the means to do so, to exert decisive pressure on South Africa and to take steps to ensure that that Government co- operates with the efforts of the Secretary-General to implement the United Nations plan for Namibia, a goal for which Mr. Martti Ahtisaari, the United Nations Commissioner for Namibia, has been doing such outstanding work; we thank him most sincerely for this. At the same time, my country hopes that the States Members of the United Nations will, through 188. In keeping with the conclusions reached by the ministerial meeting at New Delhi, my country also feels that, if the Security Council because of a veto by any permanent member is unable to implement the enforcement measures required by the present situation, an emergency special session of the General Assembly should then be conveneu at the level of Ministers for Foreign Affairs', in order to review the question of Namibia and adopt the measures that are appropriate in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. That type of action must not be side- stepped, since Namibia is the direct responsibility of the United Nations and since the Organization is in duty bound to render effective the self-determination and independence of a united Namibia. 189. The question of Namibia represents not only the most shameful remnant of colonialism in the world, but also the accumulation of more than three decades of frustration of the United Nations system by the obstinate refusal of South Africa to fulfil its intemationel obligations. 190. It is possible to affirm, without fear of error, that the question of Namibia has the potential to des- troy the United Nations, just as the question of Abys- sinia led to the downfall of the League of Nations. 191. In this situation, the lack of political will among the permanent members of the Security Council, with their veto power, has played an important role. As a result, the international community has up to the present been unable to resolve the question of Namibia and the problems of southern Africa, nor has it been able to resolve many other grave problems, such as those concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict in the Mid- dle East, the situation in South East Asia, the situa- tion in S<,.Jth West Asia, the uestion of Cyprus and conflicts affecting the very ~ xistence of the coastal States of the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. 194. In connexion with the other disturbing prob- lems and international conflicts which my country has mentioned, we believe that those could be con- sidered with the possibility of success at a meeting of the Security Council at the level of heads of State or Government, along the lines suggested by the Presi- dent of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union, Leonid Brezhnev. There would, of course, have to be adequate preparatory work for that, which would have to include broad agreement on an agenda and possible solutions and agreement would have to be reached among the permanent members of the Security Council not to utilize the veto and to arrive at negotiated solutions that could com- mand a consensus. 195. We have no doubt that in compliance with the feelings of Member States the Secretary-General and the very experienced Secretariat staff would co- operate enthusiastically in preparations for the con- vening of such an important meeting. 196. The solution of the question of Namibia cannot be made subordinate to the conflicts that exist be- tween the two super-Powers because insurmountable obstacles would then arise. The task of the General Assembly is to seek ways and means to put an end to colonialism, racism and apartheid in southern Africa, and in particular in Namibia, towards that end over- coming the obstacles that exist. It is clear that the era of detente that began in 1972 came to an abrupt end in 1980 with the Soviet -invasion of Afghanistan, which has opened the door to a return to the regret- table methods of the cold war. 197. A new United States policy to restore that country's superiority has been clear as of 20 January 1981 and has given extraordinary priority to strategic interests, or so-called international security, above and beyond any other concern of a social, cultural, economic or spiritual nature. We wonder what con- sideration will be given to the heartfelt yearnings for freedom of all dependent peoples, the denial of which is the most serious threat to world peace. As was stated by the Secretary-General at New Delhi, in addition to the question of Namibia, "there exist unfortunately a number of unresolved problems in other parts of Africa and in Latin America". The new policy of rearmament, the hard line adopted by President Reagan's Administration to contain so- called Soviet expansionism, has created a comma- 198. We believe that the question of Namibia, Afri- can problems, Latin American problems, Asian problems and the complex situation in the Persian Gulfcannot be resolved using the criterion of whether the solution of such problems is in harmony with the alleged "vital interests" of NATO or the Warsaw Pact alliance. Rather than in Africa, we believe, or in El Salvador, as stated by James Reston and reported on 28 February 1981 in The New York Times, it is in the area between the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean that the threat of Soviet expansion must be dealt with. 199. Latin Americans and North Americans share the same geographical space in the western hemi- sphere. Our respective countries-and here histo- rians on both sides agree-were formed by radicals who cherished freedom and began their independent life as a result or-a bloody liberation revolution which freed them from their colonial status-because we were colonies. We have many reasons to live in peace as good neighbours and to give validity, in the exer- cise of our sovereign equality, to the principles of international law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter. 200. Aware as it is that it is not a territory that lends itself to colonialism or neo-colonialism or any kind of hegemony or foreign domination, Latin America aspires to live in harmony with the States of the continent, which must no doubt oe aware of Latin America's importance to the international community as the most highly industrialized region of the devel- oping world and as a region which, moreover, is com- posed of young nations whose population in the next two decades will reach the figure of 600 million per- sons, of which two thirds will be under 25 years of age. 201. For Latin America, the case of El Salvador, which has been compared with that of Africa, has particular characteristics since its social and eco- nomic problems are more profound than those created by struggles between ideological groups. The case of El Salvador, moreover, has been presented on the continent and beyond as a problem that is global in character rather than regional. The impact that this approach will have on the future of the inter-American system can be assessed from the reactions which have recently been manifested and will be manifested in Latin American capitals at the governmental and non-governmental level. 202. The Government of Panama agrees with the Government of Mexico that a military solution is not viable and cannot be lasting and that only a political solution resulting from a peacefully negotiated con- sensus can restore peace and security to the region. The same concern has been expressed by other im- portant sectors of Latin American and European mibia because of the possible use of the veto. 206. Everyone is aware of the priority importance attached by the major Powers of the East and West to their relations with the countries in their respective military alliances and with the countries that are the keys to their control of world transportation routes, of the supply of oil and other raw materials, and to the projection of their political, economic, social and cultural influence. The case of South Africa is an example of this phenomenon, given the importance of that country for the control of the sea route around the Cape as a means of access to the Indian Ocean and the South Atlantic. 207. The United Nations, in adopting the Declara- tion on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, expressed its con- viction that the continuation of colonialism prevents the development of international economic co-opera- tion, obstructs the social, cultural and economic development of dependent peoples and militates against the ideal' of universal peace of the United Nations. That conviction remains valid, because strategic interests must not prevail over the yearning of peoples for freedom nor undermine their right to the exercise of self-determination and the achieve- ment of territorial integrity and independence. 209. Those who feel that the interests of a State are safeguarded when priority is given to international security over the vital interests of the population concerned are committing a serious mistake. Hence we wonder, can there be international security with- out national stability? Can the security of a State or group of States be protected, as resentment builds up in them, by promoting the subjection of peoples to foreign domination and exploitation or by denying them their basic human rights? 210. Small and medium-sized countries do not have the physical means to put an end to the monstrous oppression suffered by Namibia under the South African colonial yoke. But what we can do is rise up in international forums, as we are doing in the Gen- eral Assembly, uniting in a respectful but forceful demand that the major Powers put an end to their rivalry and confrontation and place their vast resour- ces at the service of the United Nations to find a prompt solution to this problem through a peaceful process leading to independence for the Namibian nation. In a highly interdependent world such as the one in which we are living, Panama, like other Latin American countries, and together with the other non-aligned States, is opposed to having international problems resolved from the sectoral standpoint of a Communist or non-Communist world. Intelligent minds must be aware of the dangers involved for freedom and democracy as a result of such an ap- proach, which could promote a resurgence of fascism and nazism, the architects of which unleashed the tragic hecatomb produced by the Second World War. It must, therefore, be a source of deep concern for peace-loving States that third world countries are deliberately chosen as appropriate theatres of con- frontation between the United States and the Soviet Union. 21' . We must admit that in the Assembly the view prevails that the resources available to the major 215. We are confident that the voice of Africa, the voice of Asia, the voice of Latin America and the voice of non-aligned Europe, united with the outcry of oppressed peoples, through the Assembly and by the adoption of the draft resolutions submitted by the United Nations Council for Namibia, will enable the Security Council to implement, on the basis of Chap- ter VII of the Charter, the political and economic enforcement measures that will compel South Africa to comply fully with the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia.