A/35/PV.107 General Assembly

Almost 15 years have gone by since the General Assembly, in resolution 2145 (XXI) of 27 October 1966, declared that Namibia was the direct responsibility of the United Nations, in order to enable the population of the Territory to exercise its right to self-determination and independence. However, the Organization has still not managed to oblige South Africa to withdraw from Namibia, and the apartheid regime thus continues savagely to oppress and to exploit the population and wealth of Namibia. At the opening of the thirty-fifth session, while the international community noted and hailed the victory of the people of Zimbabwe in their struggle for national independence and solemnly celebrated the twentieth anniversary of the historic Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples [resolution 1514 (XV)), we were severely disappointed to see that the people of Namibia were still continuing to suffer physically and spiritually from the oppressive colonial yoke which had been imposed en them for almost 60 years by the South African regime. It is therefore with a feeling of deep frustration that the delegation of the Lao People's Democratic Republic once again is taking part in the discussion of the question of Namibia, which we hope will very shortly be satisfactorily resolved. 2. Meanwhile, we are constrained to note that Pre- toria, instead of learning from the failure of its attempts to keep Zimbabwe as a buffer State. last year stepped up and developed repressive measures against Nami- NEW YORK bian patriots and increased its manoeuvres in order to foil any initiative for a peaceful settlement of the question of Namibia. In this context we have witnessed a number of illegal unilateral actions taken by the racist minority regime of South Africa with a view to imposing its internal settlement on us at all costs. In this respect, while pretending to accept negotiations on the organization offree and democratic elections in Namibia in accordance with Security Council resolution 385 (1976), the apartheid regime organized a mockery of an election after which a so-called Constituent Assembly was set up with wide executive and legislative powers. 3. Although the international community has severely condemned and categorically refused to recognize this play-acting, the racist regime none the less is stub- bornly going ahead with its administrative preparations to perpetuate the policy of auartheid in Namibia by establishing a so-called Council of Ministers with executive powers in almost every field. All these events make it quite clear that South Africa's feigned acceptance of participation in the process of a negotiated settlement has above all served that regime as a smokescreen for carrying through its own plan of internal settlement consisting of the establishment at Windhoek of a puppet government, thus conferring a semblance of legality to the racist occupation. 4. If the racist regime of South Africa has thus far been able to act with arrogance and cynicism, it is because it has benefited from the indulgence of Western circles and other forces of exploitation. Indeed, every- one is aware that for more than three years the five Western countries have been carrying on negotiations with the apartheid regime with great fanfare in order to arrive at a negotiated settlement of the question of Namibia. However, as it has turned Nit, these negotia- tions have above all given the racists of Pretoria a respite to mature fresh plans for their internal settle- ment and to weaken the position of the South West Africa People's Organization [SWAPO], which is the sole genuine representative of the Namibian people. The setting up of a number of puppet political parties, in the vain hope of having them share power with SWAPO, if not actually replacing that movement, proceeds directly from South Africa' s sinister plan to chip away at SWAPO's influence. 5. In that connexion, South Africa even went so far as blatantly accusing the United Nations of partiality, calling on it to withdraw its recognition of SWAPO as the sole authentic representative of the Namibian people: moreover. it cynically argued that the Nami- bian conflict was one between SWAPO and the so- called other parties. But. as everyone is aware, the struggle of the Namibian people. under the leadership of its sole representative. SWAPO, is a struggle against colonialism. illegal occupation and apartheid, and for 6. This is now shown, within Namibia, by the stepped-up systematic and continuous harassment, torture and imprisonment of Namibian patriots, particularly members of SWAPO, whose crime was to have struggled for the exercise of their inalienable right to self-determination and independence. The death sentence meted out to Markus Kateka by the illegal occupation authorities has been upheld, despite universal indignation and protestation. This is just one more appalling measure to silence the just struggle waged by the valiant Namibian people. 7. What is more, South Africa, thanks to the indul- gence of Western imperialist circles, has used the three years of negotiation to strengthen its military capa- bility in Namibia, employing that Territory as a spring- board for launching repeated acts of aggression against independent front-line States, particularly Angola and Mozambique, which have done no more than fulfil their lofty duty ofsolidarity with the people of Namibia in its just struggle to regain independence. The recent acts ofaggression against those two countries represent a serious threat to peace and security in that part of the world. Those unprovoked acts of aggression, which the delegation of the Lao People's Democratic Republic energetically condemns, were accompanied by alarming declarations by the South African authorities that the Pretoria racist regime would not hesitate to resort to the nuclear option if it thought it necessary to do so. There is every reason to fear, in view of its insane reactions thus far, that the racist regime will not hesitate to unleash a nuclear war to perpetuate its domination over the Namibian people and to exert its influence over other countries of southern Africa. 8. The illegal South African authorities in Namibia are characterized not only by their aggressive and repressive nature but also by their criminal exploita- tion, in collusion with imperialist transnational corporations, of Namibia's natural resources, in total defiance of Decree No. 1 for the Protection of the Natural Resources of Namibia, enacted by the United Nations Council for Namibia [A/35/24, vol. I, annex 1/]. Farthermore, the hearings on Namibian uranium organized by the Council [ibid., vol. 11/] have clearly revealed the close co-operation between the illegal South African Administration in Namibia and certain Western countries in the exploitation and purchase of Namibian uranium. 9. We vigorously condemn that illegal and clandestine co-operation, which has enabled its perpetrators to make scandalous profits. Hence, it is extremely urgent to make possible the strict and full implementation of Decree No. I with a view to putting an end, once and for all, to the shameless exploitation of Namibia's natural resources. Otherwise, those riches will be rapidly exh-usted and the people of Namibia, when it does gain independence, will '; poorer than ever. 10. In this connexion, all Governments, particularly those of the Western countries that have not yet 11. When the General Assembly decided to post- pone consideration of the question of Namibia to await the result of the pre-implementation meeting on the United Nations plan, held at Geneva in January, my delegation had serious doubts that any tangible, results could be expected of that meeting. That scep- ticism was based on the fact that South Africa had always had a negative attitude towards the United Nations and had never shown any interest in solving the Namibian question. Furthermore, after the state- ment by the South African Government prior to the meeting to the effect that that country would not be directly involved in the organization of elections in Namibia, my delegation finally ceased to believe that such a meeting could be of any use. It is regrettable that it actually did end in failure, a failure for which South Africa was fully responsible. It is also to be regretted that South Africa's Western protectors, because they did not bring enough pressure to bear on their racist ally, share the responsibility for that failure. However, we must not overlook the fact that, although South Africa finally did decide to take part in the Geneva meeting, it was not with the intention of solving the key problems of Namibia-namely, the achievement of a cease-fire and a transition to inde- pendence-but, rather, with the aim of carrying out further manoeuvres to distract the attention of the international community from Namibia's real problems and to gain time to enable the illegal South African Administration in Namibia further to consolidate its occupation of the Territory. Also, the main aim of South Africa, in agreeing to take part in the meeting, was, above all, to try to have the so-called Democratic Turnhalle Alliance [0TA ] accepted as the true power in Windhoek and, thereby, legitimize permanently its occupation of Namibia. But it is worthwhile stressing that South Africa will in no way manage to carry through its sinister designs, because the international community is more aware than ever of the true problem of Namibia. SWAPO, the sole legitimate representative of the Namibian people, for its part showed maturity and political wisdom and was ready to further a political settlement in Namibia by every possible means, in accordance with the United Nations plan. Unfortunately, the South African Government did not think it worth while to take action to that end, and, consequently, the Namibian patriots and their representative, SWAPO, had scarcely any alternative but to win the independence of Ncrnibia or: the battlefield, in a struggle which enjoys the ever wider and more resolute support of all peace-loving and justice-loving peoples. 12. After three years of dilatory tactics and empty promises, and particularly after the failure ofthe recent Geneva meeting, the United Nations must not continue to allow itself to be deceived and abused by the racist regime of Pretoria and its allies. Given its heavy I 13. The delegation of the Lao People's Democratic Republic considers that it is high time that the General Assembly took effective measures to foil all the manoeuvres and perfidious ruses of South Africa and fully guarantee the realization of the legitimate aspira- tions of the Narnibian people to self-determination and independence. In that regard we fully support the Algiers Declaration and Programme of Action on Namibia [ibid., \'01. /, para. 91], and we call once again on the Security Council to implement without delay its resolution 439 (1978), in which it clearly stated that if South Africa did not co-operate with it and with the Secretary-General in the implementation of the relevant resolutions of the United Nations concerning Namibia, in particular Security Council resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (1978), it would be compelled to initiate appropriate actions, including those provided for in Chapter VII o( the Charter. Thus far there is nothing to show that the racist regime of South Africa has acted in conformity with the provisions of those resolutions. Quite the contrary; it has continued to defy the Organization with increasing arrogance. As for the Western States permanent members of the Security Council, which witnessed the irresponsible behaviour of South Africa throughout the Geneva meeting, if they sincerely want Namibia to gain inde- pendence according to the time-table established by the United Nations, they must join in the endeavours of the international community to impose comprehensive economic sanctions against South Africa. Should the Security Council fail to meet its responsibilities by adopting such measures, the delegation of the Lao People's Democratic Republic will fully support the call of the Conference of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Countries, which was held at New Delhi from 9 to 13 February 1981, for the convening of an emergency special session of the General Assembly at the foreign minister level to reconsider the question of Namibia and to take appropriate measures in accordance with the Charter. 14. The delegation of the Lao People's Democratic Republic would like once again to reaffirm its firm support for the just struggle of the people of Namibia for its right to self-determination and independence in the unity and territorial integrity of the country, including Walvis Bay. South Africa must immediately withdraw its Administration and its armed forces, which are illegally on Namibian soil, and bring about the transfer of full powers to the people of Namibia through SWAPO, its sole legitimate and authentic representative. My delegation is convinced that the General Assembly will worthily fulfil its responsibilities in contributing to the achievement of these aims.

When the General Assembly decided last December to postpone its debate on the situation in Namibia, it was in the hope that the forthcoming pre-implernentation meeting at Geneva would become a breakthrough in the long process towards a free and independent Namibia. 21. In the view of my Government it must first be emphasized once again that the United Nations has a special responsibility towards Namibia and that that responsibility cannot be relinquished until an interna- tionally acceptable settlement has been reached in accordance with Security Council resolution 435 (1978). 22. Secondly, we should try to exploit whatever positive results came out of the Geneva meeting. It is of crucial importance that the talks be resumed at an early date with a view to finding a way out of the present impasse. My delegation holds the firm view that the United Nations must not relax its efforts on be' alf 24. Fourthly, we also urge the five members of the Western contact group to continue their efforts to bring about an independent Namibia at an early date. That group was the initiator of the United Nations plan. We find it more important today than ever before that the contact group maintain its efforts to bring about the early implementation of the plan. 25.In conclusion, it must be emphasized that the Namibian question has a bearing far beyond the borders of Namibia. South Africa's policies at present pose a serious threat to peace and stability in southern Africa and beyond. If South Africa maintains its negative attitude and strategy of stalling towards the United Nations plan the international community will have no choice but to revert to effective international measures under the Charter.

In the spring of 1978, when it was announced that South Africa had accepted the Western plan for the independence of Namibia, there were many doubts about the sincerity of the racist regime of South Africa. The record over the past three years of negotiations, consultations and talks with the South African regime has confirmed the validity of those doubts. It is unnecessary to recount all the difficult stages of the process which are already known to the General Assembly. But the record is clear that, while the other parties directly concerned have negotiated in good faith, South Africa has employed every available tactic for obstructing the implementa- tion of the plan for Namibian independence adopted by the Security Council in its resolution 435 (1978). Those tactics include violent provocations directed at the other parties to the negotiations, the holding of unilateral elections and the adoption of other illegal measures in the Territory, the introduction of new elements not included in the original plan, and demands for more and more concessions from other parties. The Geneva talks held in January were the latest victim of those tactics. On that occasion, with no more substantive issues left to discuss, South Africa manufactured the so-called impartiality question to justify its refusal to co-operate in setting a date for the implementation of the plan. 27. This intransigent attitude on the part of the South African racist regime at the conference table should be viewed alongside its other activities in southern Africa. Inside Namibia it is seeking to impose a group of puppets to masquerade as representatives of the people and to constitute them as a so-called council of ministers. This band of quislings is kept in power by the army of occupation, which maintains an intensified campaign of terror and repression in the Territory. In addition, we have witnessed a recent escalation of acts of aggression against front-line African States, particularly Mozambique and Angola. 32. We urge the Western members not to be guided by the politics of kith and kin and by short-term material interests and not to repeat the triple veto of 1975. From the standpoint of both principle and expediency it is important at this time that no country cast its lot with South Africa. South Africa's gamble 34. My country will remain committed to the achievement of genuine majority rule in a free, inde- pendent and united Namibia. The intransigence of the Pretoria regime is apparently leading to a situation where the achievement of these objectives will increasingly depend on the armed struggle of the Namibian people. As custodians of their legitimate hopes and aspirations, the international community must be prepared to provide the requisite political and material support for that people. 35. We must seek also to end the deplorable exploita- tion of the human and natural resources of Namibia by foreign economic interests operating principaIly from some Western countries. Their continuing activities help to maintain and strengthen the illegal regime in Namibia and contribute to frustrating and delaying the achievement of independence. 36. Before concluding, I should like, on behalf of my delegation, to congratulate the United Nations Council for Namibia on its work over the past year and to pay a tribute to the outstanding leadership of Mr. Lusaka. Once again, the Council has placed before the Assembly a number of constructive recom- mendations, which have our support.

The question of Namibia has now become the most salient issue in the decolonization struggle. Its consideration in the present circumstances, at the resumed thirty-fifth session, has a greater urgency and significance.: 38. Since the thirty-fourth session the people of Zimbabwe have won national independence after an arduous, protracted struggle. The glorious birth of the Republic of Zimbabwe has radically altered the balance of power between the African people and the South African racist forces, thereby giving a powerful impetus to the struggle of the Namibian and South African peoples against racist rule. Inspired by the victory of the Zimbabwean people. the Namibian people have further heightened their militancy. Led by SWAPO and supported by the peoples of various countrie, of Africa and the rest of the world, the Namibian people have defied their brutal enemy in their sustained struggle, dealing heavier and heavier blows to the South African authorities. Enlightened by a wealth of experience gained in the process. and with renewed dedication and fervour, they are intensifying various means of struggle. including armed struggle. to achieve national liberation and inde- pendence. 39. This righteous struggle enjoys ever-increasing sympathy and support from the people of Africa and

The problem of the long-suffering people of Namibia has claimed the attention of the international community and of the General Assembly for many years now. In the present circumstances, where there is a heightened conflict between the forces of national liberation and progress and those of imperialism and reaction, it takes on a special significance. 50. Last December the United Nations and, indeed, all progressive mankind solemnly celebrated the twentieth anniversary of the historic Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, which indicated the way leading to the free and independent oevelopment of dozens of States in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Today we can point with some pride to the fact that the process of the final elimination of colonialism has now reached its culminating stage. A new and important achieve- ment on this path was the establishment of the newly created State of Zimbabwe, whose people, as a result of its own valiant struggle, swept aside the white minority regime in Rhodesia and won its independence. This fact, and also the growing intensity of the libera- tion struggle in Namibia and South Africa itself, has clearly shown, as was emphasized at the twenty-sixth Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union by the Head of the Soviet State and General Secre- tary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Comrade Brezhnev, that "the domination of 'classic' colonizers and racists is reaching its end". 51. However, the blots of colonialism have not yet disappeared from the face of our planet. The long- suffering people of Namibia remain under the heel of the South African colonizers, who have openly thrown down the gauntlet to the international community. In attempting at all costs to keep this Territory under its control, the Fascist regime of Pretoria has ignored and flouted the numerous General Assembly and Security Council resolutions and is attempting to consolidate its presence in Namibia, further stepping up the 52. The militarization of Namibia by South Africa, whose troops in the Territory now total more than 70,000, is continuing at an ever-increasing rate. Namibia is being used by the South African racists as a beach-head to enable them to carry out acts of aggression against neighbouring African States. with a view to intimidating the front-line States and depriving the Namibian patriots of assistance and support. Last June the Security Council once again considered the further acts of aggression against the People's Republic of Angola, as a result of which more than 600 persons were killed or wounded, mostly women and children. Zambia has been a target of constant armed invasions by South Africa and also of bombings and artillery fire. A fresh act of international terrorism was perpetrated by the Pretoria racists on 30 January this year, when they attacked a camp of refugees from South Africa situated in the suburbs of the capital of the People's Republic of Mozam- bique. As a result of machine-gun fire and mortar fire nine persons were killed and many wounded in that camp. 53. The list of the misdeeds and illegal acts which the racists in Pretoria, throwing off all restraint, have perpetrated could be continued. And the reply to the question of why for so many years the South African racists have been able to carry out acts that are in blatant contradiction of the norms of interna- tional law can be found, as we know, not in the strength of the regime itself but, rather, in the broad political, economic and military support which it receives from outside. The days of the apartheid regime would have been numbered long ago had the transnational corporations of Western countries not had a deep-rooted desire to preserve the colonial regime in Namibia, which guarantees them fabulous profits through the merciless exploitation of the human and natural resources of that country in violation of Decree No. ) enacted by the United Nations Council for Namibia and approved by the General Assembly. The progressive depletion of Namibia's natural resources is causing growing concern in the interna- tional community in view of the possible deleterious effects of such depletion on the future economic viability of independent Namibia. 54. In collusion with the occupying South African regime foreign economic circles are plundering the natural resources of the Territory on an ever-growing scale. As is indicated in document AIAC. 109/6) I, the exploitation of minerals in the Territory of Namibia involves at least 32 foreign companies with head- quarters in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Canada and South Africa. The same document goes on to state that during the 15-month period ending 3) March 57. Evidence that the Pretoria regime has utilized the prolonged period of negotiation to implant its puppets in Namibia is provided by the fact that a so-called council of ministers has been set up in Wind- hoek as the governing body of the Territory. How- ever, the illegality of these maneeuvres of South Africa has frequently been emphasized by the United Nations, which has quite justly indicated that they are simply further attempts to block ajust settlement of the Namibian problem and to preserve the old order in Namibia. That became quite clear at the recent Geneva meeting on Namibia. The delegation of the Republic of South Africa brought about the breakdown of the United Nations plan by refu- 109 to agree to a cease- fire and various other points in it. The Geneva meeting once again demonstrated the Botha regime's ignorance of the elementary norms of international law and its open defiance of the United Nations and its decisions. 58. The time has now come to take resolute and effective steps to force South Africa to submit to the will of the international community, which has been expressed in numerous resolutions and decisions of the General Assembly, the Security Council and other United Nations bodies. The delegation ofthe Ukrainian SSR believes that the right of the people of Namibia to self-determination and independent development on the basis of unity and territorial integrity cannot and should not be the subject of bargaining. The South African regime is occupying Namibia illegally 60. The delegation of the Ukrainian SSR would like to state that in their just struggle for liberation the people of Namibia can always rely on the complete solidarity and comprehensive support of the Ukrainian people and of all Soviet peoples.

The weeks preceding the resumption of the thirty-fifth session of the General Assembly to consider the question of Namibia w. . -ssed an unprecedented international effort aimed at a peaceful transition to independence in Namibia. Never before had the international community shown such unity and determination to secure Namibia's independence. In keeping with the direct responsibility that it had assumed for Namibia, the United Nations provided the leadership for that effort, which explored every avenue that might lead to early implementation of the relevant United Nations resolutions. There was world-wide expectation, indeed, hope against hope, that an independent Namibia would be born before the end of the current year. But we are now back in the General Assembly with accumulated frustration and indignation. What has not been lost is OUI deter- mination to meet the challenge that this question poses to the conscience of humanity. Indeed, that determina- tion is the greater in the wake of recent failures. To many of us, the collapse of the pre-implementation meeting at Geneva was a foregone conclusion because the issues to be tackled were either beyond its com- petence or were not relevant to the pre-implernentation stage. If South Africa was genuinely interested in the implementation of the United Nations plan, it hardly needed any proof of the ability of the United Nations to carry out its responsibilities with regard to the Territory. The preparedness of the United Nations 63. The new situation is characterized by a new challenge, and it ought to elicit a new response from the i . uional community. Deliberations in the interns .. tal meetings held at Arusha, Lusaka, New Delhi and Addis Ababa were devoted to a search for that response. Opinion was unanimous in those meetings that the time for negotiations with South Africa had passed and that the time had come for the international community to help prepare for the final struggle to li.erate Namibia. The world community came to the inevitable conclusion that only the strengthening of SWAPO by all available means would result in success and that the threat to international peace and security caused by South Africa's intran- sigence made it imperative for the United Nations fully to isolate South Africa politically and economically. 64. We do hope that a rapid reappraisal of policies is taking place in certain capitals which had indirectly encouraged South Africa in its defiance of world opinion. The behaviour of South Africa at the pre- implementation meeting should have come as a shocking revelation to its friends who were under the illusion that patient negotiations would persuade that country to restore the rights of the people of Namioia. If their protestations about their faith in human rights and liberty are genuine and not a mere facade behind which they hide ambitions of economic benefit through collusion with the racist regime, they owe it to them- selves to be clear and forthright in their declarations and actions. If they fail to do so now, they too will be missing an opportunity to count,» racist terrorism, 66. The support, rooted in principles, that has been extended to the people of Namibia by the front-line States has cost the latter dear in terms of economic hardship and th~ constant threat ofaggressive reprisals from across their borders. South Africa's armed aggres- sion against Mozambique, Angola and Zambia was designed to destroy their persistent determination to liberate Namibia and to render them unable to assist SWAPO. We express our solidarity with the front-line States and reiterate our faith and conviction that whatever the sacrifice, it will not deter them from continuing to adhere to the principled stand that they have taken in support of Namibian liberation. The official communique issued after a meeting ofthe heads of the front-line States held at Lusaka on 17 February 1981 is testimony to their determination to continue to assist SWAPO in all fields, including political, economic, diplomatic and military assistance. 67. The report of the United Nations Council for Namibia [A/35/24 and Corr.1 and 2] is an exemplary record of its untiring efforts to fulfil the mandate given to it by the terrns of resolution 2248 (S-V) of 19 May 1967. Though its primary objective of ensuring the withdrawal of South Africa from Namibia has remained unattained, the Council has continued to function effectively as the only legal Administering Authority for Namibia and has mobilized international support for the cause of Namibia. The unique responsi- bility entrusted to the Council has invested it with unprecedented rights and obligations which have not been fully appreciated by some States Members of the United Nations. The Council has been handicapped by inadequate appreciation of its responsibilities, by deliberately ambivalent attitudes and at times even by total hostility. It is imperative for the Council as a whole to adopt positions in the best interests of the people of Namibia, regardless of the individual predilections and policies of its own member States. Suggestions in the Council that it should condone South African actions or remain patient to allow South Africa to choose its own time and method for granting freedom to Namibia are inadmissible. We are therefore gratified that the Council has adopted for itself a set of guide- 68. The major achievement of the Council during the past year has been the success it has registered in making the voice of Namibia heard round the world through its visiting missions, its delegations to interna- tional conferences, its extraordinary plenary meetings held at Algiers, at which it adopted the historic Declara- tion and Programme of Action, and finally the hearings on uranium held last year. The report of the Panel which conducted the hearings forms a part of the Council's report to the Assembly. It provides a wealth of information on the illegal exploitation of Namibian uranium and focuses attention on the motivations of certain Governments which have encouraged their multinational corporations to operate freely in Namibia. Indeed, the report provides a deep insight into the policies of certain Western nations with regard to Namibia. It shows that certain countries are fully exploiting the situation in Namibia to amass profits for themselves and to acquire control over the uranium reserves of Namibia. If those Governments have no qualms about depriving the people of Namibia of its natural heritage, if they are in a hurry to make hay while the sun shines, can they be expected to expedite any process that will eventually result in the denial of their present privileged position? Will they ever willingly become the instruments for facilitating freedom for Namibia, only to surrender the business empires they have built up so carefully over the years in collusion with the colonial regime? Such are the questions raised by the Panel after collating informa- tion on the exploitation of uranium in Namibia. The report of the Panel will also serve to enable the inde- pendent Government of Namibia to claim damages from those who have plundered the natural resources of Namibia and created hazards for the local popula- tion by neglecting to observe even the most rudi- mentary safety precautions in the mining of uranium. 69. The conclusions arrived at by the Panel and the recommendations made by it deserve utmost attention from the world community. The Panel has established beyond any doubt that the activities of foreign eco- nomic interests in Namibia are in violation of decisions of the Gene ral Assembly, theSecurity Council and the International Court of Justice. Even without the abundant evidence submitted to the Panel, it is clear that since the occupation of Namibia by South Africa is illegal, any activity undertaken there as part of an arrangement with the South African regime is also illegal. Now that the corporations involved stand totally exposed, the United Nations is in a better position to demand of its Member States that they take effective action to prevent their corporations from engaging in mining in Namibia. Equally important is the recommendation made by the Panel that the concerned countries should be asked to cease every kind of nuclear co-operation with South Africa so that it cannot improve its nuclear capability and thus further endanger peace and security in the world. The Chairman of the Panel, Mr. Noel Sinclair, of Guyana,' deserves to be congratulated on the excellent work the Council has done in this field. ••A struggle for freedom can be suppressed; its soldiers killed, imprisoned, humiliated. But the idea of freedom cannot be stamped out; some spark will persist to burst unto flame somewhere, sometime, to light the way and iIlumine hearts and ultimately lead to success. Neither colour nor caste nor sex makes one person superior or inferior. No matter what laws South Africa devises for itself, history cannot be denied nor will the inexorable march of the future be halted."

The General Assembly has met again tr deal with the problem of Namibia in an atmosphere characterized by betrayed expectations and at a time when we have reached -as was recently stated at the Conference of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Coun- tries at New Delhi-a critical moment of deteriora- tion in international relations. 73. South Africa has once again confirmed that it can defy with impunity the decisions of the world Organiza- tion by continuing its illegal occupation of Namibia, although we had wanted to believe that all the condi- tions had been created for the pre-implementation negotiations to lead to the final submission of South Africa to the will of the majority and to South Africa's withdrawal from Namibia. For this reason it was decided to postpone consideration of the problem of Namibia during the thirty-fifth session of the General Assembly so as to ensure, as it was argued, that the debate on this question would not jeopardize the prospects for reaching agreement at Geneva. 74. It was yet another attempt by the international community to bring about a peaceful solution through the implementation of the United Nations plan. Thus everything was done in order to make it impossible for South Africa to find any pretext for continuing its policy of illegal occupation. SWAPO, for its part, has given proof of statesmanship and responsible be- haviour, striving to contribute to the successful out- come of that meeting. While the whole world held its breath in the hope that the road towards the inde- pendence of Namibia had been cleared, South Africa once again arrogantly ignored the universal demand for the liberation of Namibia and brought about the failure 75. All actions by South Africa, including its pre- tended readiness to negotiate with the United Nations, are aimed at preserving the present situation in Nami- bia as long as possible, with a view to continuing a policy of oppression and exploitation. In this con- nexion, South Africa obviously expects that the puppet groups it itself installed will, in the meantime, become sufficiently strong to assume the role of protagonists of so-called independence, which, under such circum- stances, could not be anything else but a sham. 76. As shown by the reports before us, the Pretoria regime continues to pursue a policy of internal op- pression and external aggression. It is doing so in order to stifle the liberation struggle that the people of Namibia is waging under the leadership of SWAPO, its sole authentic representative, and to undermine international solidarity with that struggle. The system of apartheid and reign of terror persists; acts of ag- gression continue to be perpetrated with impunity against the independent African front-line States, inflicting heavy losses in human lives and causing vast material damage. 77. In pursuing this policy, South Africa enjoys, or hopes to enjoy, the support of forces which are interested in transforming that part of the world permanently into a raw-materials reserve or strategic stronghold. Actually, it is obvious that one of the main factors prompting South Africa to hold on to Namibia at all costs is the Territory's natural resources, which are ruthlessly exploited by South Africa in co-operation with transnational corporations. 78. The responsibility of all of us, especially after the failure of the Geneva talks, to compel South Africa to withdraw from Namibia is greater than ever before. The responsibility rests especially with the members of the contact group, whose initiative has served as a basis for the United Nations plan. The outcome of the Geneva talks gives the impression that the contact group did not act effectively to force South Africa to implement this plan. Such a lack of effective action is objectively bound to result in prolonging South Africa's illegal Administration in Namibia. In fact, it is hard to believe that those Western countries which are engaged in all-round co-operation, including military co-operation, with South Africa are not in a position to exert the necessary influence or pressure on South Africa with a view to preventing the racist regime from undertaking actions that pose a threat to peace and security. The situation in and regarding Namibia does not require any further clarification. At the same time, it clearly points to the only proper course of action to be pursued-s-namely, the neces- sity to intensify the pressure to be brought to bear by the international community on South Africa, with all the means at its disposal, until the final liberation of Namibia. 79. This course of action was recently confirmed in the Declaration adopted by the Ministers for Foreign 80. In the light of the situation prevailing in Na- mibia, the demands put forward and the course of action advocated at the non-aligned conference are really timely and indispensable. Therefore, the General Assembly should adopt appropriate decisions on the basis of the draft resolutions which are before it. The international community cannot tolerate any longer the existing state of crisis which prolongs the suffering of the Namibian people indefinitely and destabilizes the situation on the whole African con- tinent. Any further postponement of indispensable measures would merely give South Africa more time to consolidate its so-called internal solution. Con- sequently, it is incumbent on us to take urgent action and ask the Security Council to impose economic sanctions Of) South Africa under Chapter VII of the Charter. and we must be prepared to react rapidly in case the Security Council fails to fulfil its duty. This is perhaps the last moment for taking such action and arresting the downward slide of events liable to have serious consequences. It is illusory to speak of any stability in the world or of improvement of the existing situation as long as no steps are taken for realizing the elementary right of all peoples to live free from any foreign domination. It is not possible to build a just world on injustice and proclaim freedom to be an inalienable right while continuing to tolerate lack of freedom in Namibia or anywhere else. 81. The Namibian people and SWAPO have no option but to continue their armed struggle to cast off the foreign yoke ~ this has actually proved to be a conditio sine qua non for the liberation of Namibia. Therefore, the General Assembly, if it wishes to fulfil its mandate, must reaffirm its full support for the sole, authentic representative of the people of Namibia -SWAPO- and call upon all members of the interna- tional community to lend effective material, financial, military, political and diplomatic assistance to SWAPO in its struggle to put ~1l1 end to the occupation of Namibia by the South African racist colonialist regime. In this way we would also be contributing to the realization of the objectives of the Charter of the United Nations, which has placed freedom and inde- pendence in the forefront both of the values on which the Charter is founded and of conditions for building a stable peace. 83. The international community should; at the same time, lend support and assistance to the front-line States which, owing to their support for the liberation struggle of the people of Namibia, are exposed to onslaughts against their territorial integrity, security and economic structure, suffering losses in human lives and material damage. 84. My delegation fully supports the efforts of the United Nations Council for Namibia to lend assistance to the people of Namibia and to organize international action to put an end to the occupation of that Terri- tory. The results of the Council's work in the past year are reflected in its report, which clearly shows that it has been very active 'in fulfilling its mandate. The results of its activities speak for themselves. The Council is planning further to intensify its activities in the forthcoming period, which is to be highly com- mended. 85. To our mind there is no more urgent task today than the eradication of the last remnants of colonialism and racism and the liberation ofcountries from colonial and foreign domination. Namibia is a special case, as the United Nations has been entrusted with special responsibility withrespect to that Territory. Further- more, all the conditions are ripe for the solution of this problem. The international community has repeatedly declared itself in favour of such a solution, and the iiberation movement, SWAPO, conscious of its responsibility and of its close identification with the Namibian people, is ready to submit itself to the decision of the people through elections. 86. There remains only the racist regime in Pretoria, which is deliberately resorting to the use of brute force and terror in order to achieve its aims. Thus it is posing a threat to world peace. The sooner and the more effectively we oppose that danger the better, because, in view of the situation prevailing on the international plane-a deteriorating international situation-we cannot remain passive observers of the rampaging of a regime that has excluded itself from the international community. The solution of the question of Namibia would amount to the victory of awakened national consciousness over the tendency to legalize the concept of might is right. We should thereby be simultaneously excluding the region from intensified extra-regional confrontations and contrib- uting to the consolidation of the independence of every country. 87. Yugoslavia will, as heretofore, do everything in its power, by its all-round support for the liberation struggle headed by SWAPO, to accelerate the libera- tion of Namibia, whose significance is of a universal character. Yugoslavia, which closely co-operates with SWAPO. thereby contributes to the cause of freedom and independence which is, precisely at the present moment. ever more frequently the target of the use of force in the world in general. I Lego! Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (/970), Advisory Opinion, I.e.l. Reports /97/, p. 16. 97. In the light of the foregoing, the delegation of Ecuador, in accordance with its unswerving position on this issue. will support resolutions of the Assembly the aim of which is to require the regime of South Africa to implement and observe resolutions of the General Assembly and Security Council and of other bodies in the international system concerning Namibia and which also embody the commitment of States Members of the United Nations to impose sanctions on the regime which obdurately ignores the voice of the peoples and the call of history for the only contem- porary forms of coexistence and the right of majorities which wish to express themselves in freedom and democratically to assume responsibility for their own future.

Twenty years have already passed since the interna- tional Organization adopted resolution 1514 (XV), which contains the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. During these 20 years of unremitting labour the United Nations has welcomed a number of countries which continues to defy all those resolutions and to resort to various means of terrorism and repression to per- petuate its illegal presence in Namibia, thus attempting to stifle the will of the Namibian people, which is struggling to recover its legitimate rights, in particular its inalienable right to self-determination, freedom and independence. The support given to the racist regime of Pretoria by colonialist nations, particularly the United States of America, which have close political, eco- nomic and military ties with that regime is precisely what is encouraging the latter to continue its violations of human rights, the Charter of the United Nations and resolutions of the OAU and of the non-aligned movement, to defy world public opinion, to continue its illegal occupation of Namibia and to oppress its people and deprive it of its legitimate rights. The assistance given to the racist regime of South Africa is not offered only by the colonial countries but also by transnational corporations which have laid hold on the wealth of Namibia, its mineral and maritime resources. 103. This enables the regime to continue its expan- sionist and racist policies and to extend the limits of its territorial waters, declaring the zone adjacent to the Namrbian coast its own economic zone. Together with the transnational corporations, it has plundered the human and natural resources of the region. All that is in contradiction with Decree No. I, enacted by the United Nations Council ofNamibia in September 1974. 104. Despite oppression and racial discrimination, the people of Namibia is continuing to struggle unhesitatingly and with determination, under the 107. We wish to call on the international community to implement the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council regarding the racist South African regime. We support the struggle of the heroic people of Namibia under the leadership of SWAPO, its sole authentic representative, to bring about free- dom, self-determination and the liberation of all its lands. We also pledge our total moral and material support to SWAPO and to all its decisions. 108. A short time ago, the entire world witnessed the failure of the Geneva talks because of the intransigence of the racist regime of South Africa and its insistance on adopting an arbitrary policy, its refusal to recognize the right of the Namibian people to independence and national sovereignty under the guidance of SWAPO and its refusal to abide by any of the resolutions of the United Nations. 109. For all these reasons, the decision to expel the racist regime of South Africa from the Organization was warmly welcomed. The delegation of Iraq hopes that the General Assembly will shortly be able to expel from the international community the other racist colonialist regime, which is allied with that of South Africa, namely, the Zionist entity, given the very strong resemblance between these two regimes based on oppression, intransigence and the exploitation of peoples. We must emphasize the importance of the resolutions adopted by the Conference of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Countries at New Delhi, which supported the struggle of the people of Namibia and condemned the Pretoria regime, which has adopted the cruel and aggressive policy of apart- heid and is entirely opposed to all the aspirations of the Namibian people. All those resolutions confirm the legitimacy of the struggle being waged by the people of Namibia, under the leadership of SWAPO, for freedom and independence. 111. But we had more than one reason to harbour doubts about the sincerity and political will of South Africa, since we have grown accustomed to its perfidy, its recantations and its arrogant cynicism with regard to the United Nations. 112. Indeed, since the Assembly terminated South Africa's Mandate for Namibia in 1966, a decision which was confirmed by the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice in 1971, and in spite of numerous resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, the Pretoria regime has persisted in its illegal occupation of that international Territory and has strengthened its presence there by violence and terror. 113. There is ne need to recall that the brunt of this repression falls essentially on the black population, reduced, as in South Africa itself, to sub-human status because of the colour of their skin. 114. Despite our scepticism-which could not have been more justified-we thought that the Secretary- General's initiative had some chance of succeeding, especially as it had the backing of the five Western countries which drafted the plan for the settlement of the Namibian question. Surely it was they, with the weight of their economic, military and other interests with South Africa, who held the strong cards and had effective means of pressuring the Pretoria regime into collaborating with the international community so that an end could be put to the war which is raging in Namibia and to the dangerous tension and instability which are developing in the area threatening interna- tional peace and security. 115. Besides, three of those countries are among those in which the Charter vests special responsibility in the field of the maintenance of international peace and security. 116. All these considerations were to carry very little weight, in view of Pretoria's arrogance and its deter- mination to perpetuate its domination over Namibia and to conceive of the accession of that country to independence not by means of free and democratic elections under the supervision and control of the United Nations, but through an internal process ensuring that Namibia remained in its clutches through men devoted to it, such as those of the DTA Demo- cratic, whose foolish and peculiar behaviour at Geneva outraged the international community. 120. We should also like to take this opportunity to congratulate SWAPO, whose wisdom and political maturity have impressed the international community. The Geneva meeting once again gave it an opportunity to display its lofty sense of responsibility and its constant willingness, which we should encourage, to negotiate a peaceful settlement of the Namibian question, despite the provocations and the barbaric repression which are meted out daily to its leaders and militant members by the racist authorities of Pretoria. 121. The question that now arises, after this new impasse resulting from the failure of the Geneva meeting, is how to compel South Africa to co-operate with the united Nations. 122. For the United Republic of Cameroon, which is a member of the Co-ordination Committee for the Liberation of Africa and of the United Nations Council for Namibia, the reply is quite clear and unambiguous. It is well known. We support in various ways the legitimate struggle being waged by the Namibian people, which is a struggle we share and which is embodied in SWAPO, the sole authentic representa- tive of the Namibian people. We appeal to the interna- tional community to rise above its ideological dif- ferences and to give decisive support to this struggle so that human rights may triumph, in particular, the right to freedom, self-determination and independence in a united Namibia, including Walvis Bay. 123. We reject .any unilateral solution dreamed up and imposed by South Africa and we reaffirm our concurrence with the settlement plan adopted by the Security Council in its resolution 435 (1978) and the practical ways and means of implementing it. Hence the United Republic ofCameroon will support the draft 140. How, indeed, could it be otherwise since that same reasoning is applied by the defenders of the legality and prerogatives of the Security Council only when it is a matter of the interpretation, for example, of the legal consequences deriving from the continued presence of South Africa in Namibia, in defiance of Security Council resolution 276 (1970) and of the advisory opinion of21 June 1971 in which the Interna- tional Court of Justice declared that the continued presence of South Africa in Namibia was illegal and that South Africa should immediately withdraw its Administration from Namibia. 141. May we ponder a moment the soundness of that legal argument, which was an attempt to get (he credentials of the racist South African delegation accepted, while the advocates of that argument do not express any indignation at the plunder of Namibia's natural resources organized by South Africa in full complicity with the transnational corporations under 1 tu«, Thirty-third Year. 2092nd meeting. 4 lbid., Thirty-fifth Year. Supplement for July. August and Sep- tember 1980, document S/14139. ~ lbid., Supplement for Januarv, Februarv and March 1980. document SI 13862. 6 lbld., Supplement for April. May and June 1980. document S/l3935. 7 lbid., Thirty-sixth Year. Supplement [or January. Febru, ry and March 1981. document S114333. 162. Furthermore, my delegation wishes to draw the attention of the General Assembly to the timeliness and necessity of endorsing the appeal made by the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Non-Aligned Coun- tries at the New Delhi Conference and by the Council of Ministers of the OAU at Addis Ababa, concerning the convening of the Security Council to consider the situation in Namibia and, pursuant to Chapter VII of the Charter, to impose comprehensive binding sanc- tions on racist South Africa in order to compel it to implement United Nations decisions and resolutions on Namibia. 169. Meanwhile, the international community has the solemn duty to increase material, military, financial, political and diplomatic support for the valiant people of Namibia through SWAPO. By the same token, it is indispensable that greater assistance be given to the front-line States in order to strengthen th-eir defence capacity. 163. The time has come for the Security Council fully to discharge its responsibilities for maintaining international peace and security in the case of racist South Africa's ongoing aggression against the Namibian people. A whole people has been gagged and taken hostage on the pretext of barring the way to communism in Africa. In the name ofanti-communism acts of aggression are being continually carried out by that criminal regime against Namibian refugee camps set up in Angola, Zambia and other countries in the region. In the name of anti-communism, the people of Namibia live in one huge concentration camp of the kind familiar to the world from the terror of fascism and nazism. In the name of safeguarding strategic, economic and material interests, some Governments which proclaim freedom and equality are assisting racist South Africa in its pernicious plans and designs to acquire nuclear weapons so as to make threats and if necessary use those weapons to wipe out peoples in the region that refuse to be enslaved, that refuse the wretched domination by the advocates of apartheid, that refuse the shameless plunder and exploitation of their natural and human resources. 170. If this is done, the international community will not have betrayed the Namibian people, whose eyes are on the Assembly.

Our discussion of agenda item 27, "Question of Namibia", after the breakdown of the Geneva meeting, provides us with a natural oppor- tunity to take a sober look at how things stand in regard to the decolonization of Namibia. 172. May I, at the very outset, identify certain responsibilities in order to bring out clearly the am- biguous attitude and duplicity displayed by certain Western powers whose political, military, strategic, economic and financial interests in southern Africa are closely linked with the preservation of the hideous apartheid regime of Pretoria, which seeks by every means at its disposal, including primitive savage brutality and machiavellian cunning, to maintain its illegal domination of Namibia and to turn that Territory into its "fifth province" by using puppets in its pay, either grouped together in the DTA or in tribal units. 164. We believe this language is out of date. 165. How can peoples that formerly faced the crimi- nal regime of Hitler remain insensitive to the situa- tion prevailing in Namibia? How can Governments that called upon the communist countries to ensure their survival in the past today oppose the assistance of those same countries, which the people of Namibia requires in order to drive the usurper, South Africa, from its land? 173. Actually, the international community, which stands solidly behind the legitimate struggle being waged in the field by SWAPO, has for years reiterated the precise terms it laid down for Namibia's accession to independence by peaceful means. The numerous resolutions of the General Assembly, those of the Security Council-in particular, resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (l978)-and those of the OAU and the non- aligned movement have amply underlined the condi- tions that must be met if there is to be genuine decolonization and authentic independence for Namibia under democratic conditions that will make it possible for its sorely-tried and oppressed people to exercise freely its right of self-determination and to rid itself of the horrors of the racist regime of Pre- toria-a regime which is humiliating, oppressing, 166. Racist South Africa has itself created the condi- tions required by the Charter for the application to it of the comprehensive, binding sanctions provided for in Chapter VII of the Charter. 167. The persistent violation by South Africa of Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, the bloody repression constantly imposed by the illegal South African regime on the Namibian people and the ongoing policy of aggression advocated by that regime, 168. My delegation, therefore, would like to take this opportunity to make an urgent appeal to the contact group of Western countries to exert real pressure on the racist regime of Pretoria in order to induce it to abide by the provisions of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). As the promotors of the proposed settlement which we have talked about so much, the contact group of Western countries cannot shirk its responsibilities at this critical stage in the question of Namibia. We sincerely hope that the right of veto will no longer be exercised in the Security Council to prevent that body from adopting compre- hensive binding sanctions against South African regime, which stands condemned by history. Those Powers, therefore, are accomplices in the over- exploitation of Namibia's resources. The hearings organized by the United Nations Council for Namibia enahled us to collect evidence of the complicity of those Western Powers in the illegal exploitation of Namibian uranium, The transnational corporation Rossing Uranium, Ltd., which is responsible for the illegal exploitation of uranium in Namibia, is backed by American, British, German and other capital. All of those Western capital sources, linked with the <ystem of oppression practised under apartheid, are, in this particular case of uranium exploitation, a closed club of flagrant violators of international law and the right of peoples to self-determination. All those Powers, it must be understood, will not easily give up their many interests and great profits made 011 the backs of the Namibian people without achieving their neo-colonialist designs. 176. The responsibility of certain of those Powers for the acquisition of nuclear technology by South Africa, which is using the Namibian territory of the Kalahari to carry out its nuclear experiments, is considerable. Those Powers must be held responsible for the nuclear threat posed by South Africa, which is a threat to the entire African continent. No one, particularly among the African States, can be surprised by the nuclear role being played by the racist regime of Pretoria in the global imperialist strategy which is to dominate Africa through terror-the fear of arms, including nuclear weapons. 177. Militarily and strategically, the Pretoria regime has been presented with Namibia by the countries of the West, as part of their general strategy of encircling Africa and controlling the neighbouring sea lanes in order to ensure the supply of oil and other commodities designed to serve their economies. South 182. It has thus been clearly demonstrated, and the facts I have mentioned support us in this, that the failure of the Geneva meeting marks the point at which we must do away with w, rking methods which are too often at variance with the essential conditions for the independence of Namibia as stated in the resolutions and decisions of the General Assembly and the Security Council and the advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice. 183. The international community should never lose sight of the fact that the sole driving force towards liberation in Namibia is SWAPO, the sole representa- tive of the oppressed Namibian people. We must turn to SWAPO, we must assist and strengthen it by lending it material, military and financial assistance on a larger scale, to force the racists in Pretoria to withdraw from the Territory as quickly as possible. Our diplomatic support for SWAPO necessarily entails the taking of 188. This failure of the Geneva talks shows the intransigence of the South African racists and their determination to continue their occupation of Namibia and to impose new illegal administrative measures. The failure also shows that the Western Powers were not serious in their efforts to bring about genuine independence for the Namibian people. 189. My country has always supported the legitimate struggle of the people of Namibia under the leadership of SWAPO in its fight to achieve independence, sovereignty and self-determination. In reaffirming our active support for the Namibian people in its struggle, we would also say that it is necessary to secure international suppon for SWAPO, the sole authentic representative of Namibia, and to provide material, moral and military support so that it can bring about the independence of that Territory. Severe sanctions must also be imposed on the racist regime in South Africa by the United Nations. In reaffirming the legitimacy of the struggle of the Namibian people under SWAPO's leadership, and our opposition to all measures adopted or imposed by the racist regime in Namibia, we must also condemn the countries which maintain relations with the racist regime, as well as the Western transnational companies which are pillaging the Territory's natural wealth. 190. We must also condemn all oppression of the Namibian people and secure the release of the politicians who have been imprisoned, allow the return of exiled Namibians and transfer power to the indigenous peoples of the Territory under the leader- ship of the Territory under the leadership of SW APO, Comprehensive economic sanctions should be im- posed, as well as a binding arms embargo on all weapons offered to South Africa so that the Namibian people can achieve independence and regain its complete sovereignty over its territory. 191. The New Delhi Conference expressed its full support for the right of the Namibian people to freedom, national independence and sovereignty over its territory. It also supported the heroic struggle of the Namibian people under the leadership of SWAPO, its sole authentic representative. It also condemned the racist South African regime's refusal to withdraw immediately and unconditionally from Namibia. South Africa bears full responsibility for the failure of the talks at Geneva, despite the positive attitude shown by SWAPO. Following that failure, the Conference called for the urgent convening of the Security Council to impose comprehensive sanctions on the racist regime under Chapter VII of the Charter and to reaffirm the need to strengthen material and moral support for SWAPO in order to achieve freedom and independence for the Namibian people. 192. We recall that appeal of the non-aligned movement with regard to the urgent convening of the Security Council to consider the question of imposing economic sanctions on the racist regime in South Africa. 194. We should like to pay a tribute to the United Nations Council for Namibia for the constructive role that it has played. We consider it to be the legal Administering Authority for Namibia until that Terri- tory achieves independence. We should like also to pay a tribute to the Special Committee on the Situa- tion with regard to the Implementation of the Declara- tion' on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and to the Special Committee against Apartheid for the efforts they have made.

In 1966 the General Assembly took the important decision to terminate South Africa's Mandate for Namibia. In 1967 it established the United Nations Council for Namibia, of which Turkey is one of the founding members, as the sole legal Administering Authority for the Territory until Namibia attains independence. 196. Since then the question of Namibia has con- tinuously engaged the concern of the international community, within and outside the United Nations, through the activities of the United Nations Council for Namibia, the United Nations Commissioner for Namibia and, during the last three years, through those of the five Western countries. The Security Council, in the discharge of its primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, has on several occasions considered the prevailing situation in Namibia and the future of that Territory. In the annals of the United Nations, both General Assembly and Security Council resolutions concerning Namibia clearly indicate the determined and dedicated efforts of the international community to terminate South Africa's illegal occupation of the international Terri- tory of Namibia, to end South Africa's cruel and inhuman suppression of the Namibian people, to prevent South Africa's attempts to install a puppet regime in that Territory and, above all, to ensure that the people of Namibia achieves its inalienable right to self-determination, freedom and genuine indepen- dence. 197. During this period, however, South Africa has always managed to flout those resolutions and to challenge the will of the international community through its defiant and intransigent attitude. South Africa has not only continued its illegal occupation of Namibia, but has also continually stepped up its brutal repressive measures against the people of Namibia and has imposed on it its policy of apartheid. Detentions and arrests of patriotic Namibians have continued. Members of SWAPO have been sentenced. South African aggression against the front-line States in Africa has continued in an escalating manner. This attitude of South Africa certainly violates the prin- ciples and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as those of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, and constitutes a serious threat to interna- tional peace and security. 198. Srnce early 1978. we have had before us the United Nations plan for an internationally acceptable 199. In spite of all efforts, the plan has unfortunately not been implemented to date because of the numerous questions and problems raised by South Africa at each and every phase of this peace initiative. The interna- tional community is well aware of the duplicity and lack of responsibility which have underlain the South African attitude since the very beginning. We have frequently seen the efforts for a negotiated settlement undermined by the unilateral measures resorted to by South Africa, and by its manoeuvres. Those measures culminated in the elections held unilaterally by South Africa and in the legislative powers later conferred upon the Assembly with a view to installing an illegal regime in Namibia in full defiance of Security Council resolution 439 (1978), which declared the elections and their results null and void. 200. In spite of this background and the impasse caused by the intransigent attitude of South Africa as far as the implementation of the United Nations plan is concerned, the concept of a demilitarized zone on the northern frontier of Namibia was proposed in mid-1979 by Angola in the hope of solving the last remaining problems concerning the implementation of the plan. That proposal seemed to constitute a sound basis for further negotiations. The establishment and monitoring of a demilitarized zone were accepted by SWAPO and the front-line States. The Secretary- General succeeded in bringing the parties together at Geneva in November 1979 to clarify their positions on this question. The other parties having given their approval at that meeting. it was only South Africa whose cf ,r;nite response was still to come. In fact. several mses have come from the South African offici" the Secretary-General in the meantime. Howev '', they were all conditional and inconclusive. 20 I. While sending those responses and giving the impression to the international community that South Africa was still interested in the negotiating process. the South African regime continued its unilateral measures with a view to enhancing its position in Namibia. During the course of 1980. in addition to the legislative powers it had already conferred on the National Assembly. South Africa created a so-called council of ministers in Namibia. thus attempting to enlarge the scope of competence of the illegal regime installed in Namibia. in full defiance of the relevant Security Council resolution. Furthermore. South Africa. during this period. resorted to conscripting and training additional tribal troops in the Territory. 203. Thus, contrary to the aspirations of the interna- tional community, the Geneva negotiations ended in total failure, with the delegation of South Africa declaring that it was premature for the United Nations plan to be implemented. This has no doubt been interpreted as a deliberate attempt on the part of the South African regime, which is the only party respon- sible for the failure of the Geneva meeting, to obstruct the peace process and to gain more time to enhance its position vis-a-vis the internal regime installed in Namibia at the expense of SWAPO. In fact, the deliberate measures resorted to by South Africa since then, in terms of further arrests and detentions of SWAPO patriots and an escalation of attacks against the front-line States, are ample evidence of the true intentions of South Africa in this regard. 204. In paragraph 21 of his report of 19 January 1981 on the pre-implementation meeting," the Secre- tary-General sums up in an excellent manner the current situation with which we are confronted with regard to the question of Namibia. In that paragraph he refers to the most serious international concern that the outcome of the recent Geneva meeting should cause. Furthermore, the Secretary-General also refers to members of the Security Council and all those concerned as wishing to consider the proceedings and the situation which has now arisen. Again in that context the Secretary-General makes an urgent appeal to South Africa to review with utmost care the im- plications of the Geneva meeting and to reconsider its 206. At this juncture, I find it a pleasant duty to commend the statesmanship, sense of understanding, responsibility and flexibility displayed by SWAPO, as well as the untiring and devoted efforts and con- structive role played by all the other participants in the Geneva meeting, with the exception, of course, of the delegation of South Africa. 207. While associating our delegation with the urgent appeal made by the Secretary-General to South Africa to reconsider its position with regard to the imple- mentation of the United Nations plan, we should like all other parties not to lose hope and to continue their constructive efforts to save the peace process and all their previous endeavours from going to waste. While making this appeal, we are keeping in mind the historic example of the independence of Zimbabwe, which was recently achieved, and remembering the dif- ficulties encountered all along before its independence. Now, shortly after its independence, what we see in that young State ofZimbabwe is responsible leadership and balanced and statesmanlike policies worthy of the confidence of the international community, in spite of the several difficulties it faces. What has been achieved in Zimbabwe is certainly not any easier than what it is hoped will be accomplished in Namibia. Given good- will, determination, foresight and common sense, as well as a spirit of accommodation and co-operation on the part of all parties concerned, there is no difficulty that cannot be overcome, especially when the alterna- tive is more bloodshed and more human suffering. 208. My delegation is convinced that every effort should be made and the necessary pressure exerted on South Africa during this phase of the peace initiative, and we would like to emphasize, as we also did last year, the need for Security Council action at the proper time by way of mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa, as provided for in Chapter VII of the Charter. We feel that parallel action in the Security Council in this regard, along with the conti- nuation of peace efforts, may serve to provide the necessary pressure on South Africa to ensure its co-operation with all the other parties concerned in the prompt implementation of the United Nations plan, which, we hope, will be forthcoming from this point on. We feel that this is a must, not only because of the nature of the critical situation prevailing in Namibia but also because the credibility of the ganizaticn could be at stake if the plan should l doomed to failure at this late stage. 209. I should like to seize this opportunity to reiterate our full support for the people of Namibia in its just struggle, under the leadership of SWAPO, for national independence based on democratic majority rule. We recognize SWAPO as the sole and authentic repre- sentative of the Namibian people. We commend 216. The racist South African regime has stepped up its military activities in the Territory of Namibia. It has carried out a barbaric and repressive policy against its people. It has escalated its aggression against the front-line States. The frantic military escalation carried out by the racist regime clearly demonstrates its aggressive intentions and the fact that it has no inten- tion whatsoever of co-operating in the implementation of Security Council resolution 385 (1976), on transi- tion to independence through free elections under the supervision and control of the United Nations. These actions clearly indicate that the racist regime does not intend to co-operate in the implementation of the United Nations plan for Namibian independence, which has been approved by SWAPO and the African front-line countries and endorsed by the Security Council in its resolution 435 (1978). 217. It is even clearer that the Pretoria regime has been evasive about its willingness to enter into negotia- tions in order to cover up its attempt to tighten its grip on the Territory, to set up puppet institutions there and to disrupt its national unity. Recent events, particularly the collapse of the pre-implementation talks, have demonstrated that the racist South African regime is determined to defeat the United Nations plan for Namibia worked out on the basis of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). The racist regime, which has no wish to implement that resolution, is wholly responsible for the breakdown of those talks. The posi- tion of the South African regime is based on its determination to continue exercising its illegal military power in Namibia and to continue its economic plunder and exploitation of the fighting Namibian people. 218. Our delegation cannot but pay a tribute to SWAPO for the prudent position adopted by it during the talks, which reflects its firm faith in the justness of its cause. It has proved that it is worthy of the trust placed in it by the Namibian people. 219. Following the collapse of the talks at Geneva, it is now clear that it is time to satisfy the demands of the overwhelming majority of Member States for the complete isolation of the apartheid regime of Pretoria. This requires that the Security Council adopt manda- tory sanctions against that regime in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter. 220. The international community, as represented in the General Assembly, has a special responsibility with regard to the Territory. The Assembly terminated South Africa's Mandate for Namibia in 1966. The United Nations assumed direct responsibility for the administration of the Territory. It set up the United Nations Council for Namibia as the only authority legally entitled to administer the Territory until it achieves independence. 221. Thus South Africa's defiance of Namibia is in fact defiance of the authority of the United Nations and of the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on Namibia of 1971, This challenge has