A/35/PV.111 General Assembly

We now turn to draft resolution A/35/L.52 and Add.l, entitled "Programme of work of the United Nations Council for Namibia". A recorded vote .~as been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampu- chea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland. India, Indo- nesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Demo- cratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jama- hiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philip- pines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe. Against: None.

We shall now proceed to vote on draft resolution A/35/L.53 and Add.l, entitled "Action by intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations with respect to Namibia". A recorded vote has been requested.

Next we come to draft resolu- tion A/35/L.54 and Add.l, entitled "Support for the United Nations Institute for Namibia". A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampu- chea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guinea- Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jarnahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal Nether- lands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, 5eria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Pap., New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Union of Soviet

Next, we come to draft resolu- tion A/35/L.57 and Add.l, entitled "Dissemination of information on Namibia". A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Boli- via, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampu- chea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guinea- Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malay- sia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swazi- land, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United

We now turn to draft resolu- tion A/35/L.58 and Add.l , entitled "Question of Namibian uranium". A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Re- public, Cape Verde, Chad, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia,. Demo- cratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jarnahiriya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Sao Tome and Principe, Sey- chelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Repubilc of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Narn, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zambia, Zimbabwe. Against: None. Ahstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Denmark, Finland, France, Gabon, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Samoa, Senegal, Spain Sweden, United Kingdom ofGreat Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America.

I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes after the voting. Members will recall that such statements are to be made from their seats and that the time limit is 10 minutes. 13. Mr. PASTINEN (Finland): I have the honour to speak on behalf of the five Nordic countries-Den- mark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and my own country, Finland. 14. The Nordic countries remain convinced that the illegal South African occupation of Namibia must be brought to an end and that the Namibian people must be allowed without further delay to exercise their right to self-determination and independence by means of free and fair elections under the supervision and control of the United Nations, in accordance with Security Council resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (1973). In the opinion of the Nordic countries, the United Nations plan remains the best for an internationally acceptable solution of the problem of Namibia. After the failure of the pre-implementation meeting at Geneva in January, the process of negotiation has reached a stage where it is necessary to exert the greatest possible pressure on South Africa to make it comply with the United Nations plan. 15. The Nordic countries have voted for most of the resolutions that have just been adopted. They regret that they have not been able to support them all. A number of elements have caused us difficulties; they 2 The delegations of Grenada, Haiti and Singapore subsequently informed the Secretariat that they wished to have their votes recorded as having been in favour of the draft resolution. 27. Belgium cannot subscribe to the use of armed struggle to achieve independence. Namibian indepen- dence should be achieved through peaceful means and negotiations, as is provided for in the Charter of the United Nations. 28. Further, the Belgian delegation expresses serious reservations with regard to the imposition of com- prehensive and mandatory sanctions'against South Africa. It feels that such sanctions are difficult to apply. Moreover they would clearly harm several African States whose supplies and exports depend to a large extent upon the South African economy. 29. With regard to the seven draft resolutions in favour of which the Belgian delegation has voted, we wish to say that draft resolutions A/35/L.52 and Add.I, A/35/L.53 and Add.l and A/35/L.57 and Add. 1 have not escaped the contradiction of qualifying SWAPO as the sole authentic representative of the Namibian people, while elsewhere the principle of organizing free and fair elections is commended. 30. These are some of the reservations we wished to express.

In the course of the general debate Austria had the opportunity to reaffirm its position of principle with regard to Namibia's inde- pendence and the endeavours of the United Nations to achieve it. On this basis Austria found it possible to support the majority of the draft resolutions which have just been adopted by the Assembly. There are, however, some reservations my delegation has to make. 32. We have consistently stated our firm belief that the transition of Namibia to full independence will have to be achieved by peaceful means only and as the result of negotiations. We understand the impatience and disappointment of the Namibian people in view of the protracted negotiating process. Nevertheless its long-term benefits should be balanced against the sufferings and sacrifices which armed struggle inevitably demands. Austria is convinced that in the light of the principles and goals of the Charter of the United Nations, armed struggle should not be endorsed or supported by a General Assembly resolution, nor should military support for any armed struggle be encouraged. 33. Austria is fully aware of the significant and important role which SWAPO has assumed in the fight of the Namibian people for their independence, as well as in the negotiating process, a role which undoubtedly will continue in the political future of the Territory. The final endorsement of that role, however, will be given by the Namibian people themselves in free and fair elections. The General Assembly should not prejudge this free and democratic expression of political will by the population of Namibia. to make a few comments or, the draft resolutions organ. that have just been adopted. 46. And thirdly, we cannot support any incitement 37. We abstained on draft resolutions A/35/L.50 and or condone an~ recourse to force by a~y of th~ parti~s Add.I and A/35/L,59 and Add.1 because they include concerned. It .IS t~e duty of the United Nations, 1!1 some paragraphs which Japan cannot accept, par- ab~l~~rdanfce ~I~h ItS Charte~, Ito elxhaust al~ pOSSI- ticularly those in support of armed struggle I ities 0 arnvmg at a peaceru sett ement of mterna- . '. tional disputes. Should this prove impossible, the 38. Japa~ also abst~lI~ed on t~e draft resolution .on Charter prescribes the means of remedying the the question of Narnibian uranium for the following situation. ' reasons. Operative paragraph 8 of draft resolution A/35/L,58 and Add.1 makes specific requests of Japan and several other countries. The Government of Japan fully recognizes the political significance of Decree No. I for the Protection of the Natural Re.. sources of Namibia and, as I made clear in my statement of 3 March [104th meeting], has taken measures to bring it to the attention of all companies concerned by publishing it in an official bulletin. As a result, the only Japanese company which had con- eluded a contract for the purchase ofNamibian uranium has suspended the implementation of the contract and will continue that suspension for as long as the present circumstances in Namibia exist. . 39. Thus there is absolutely no reason why Japan's name should appear in the recommendations contained in the report of the United Nations Council for Namibia. My delegation sought to have the mention of Japan deleted from the recommended draft resolu- tion contained in the document, but unfortunately our efforts were to no avail. Consequently Japan is specifically mentioned, without justification, in draft resolution A/35/L,58 and Add.l. We therefore would have liked to vote against that draft resolution; how- ever, because it is our position to co-operate with all peaceful efforts towards the early realization of an I;' independent Namibia, we abstained. 40. With regard to draft resolutions A/35/L,51 and Add.I and A/35/L,53 and Add.l, in favour of which we voted, Japan continues to have the same reserva- tio~S it expressed at the thirty-fourth session

My delegation has just voted for all the draft resolutions concerning agenda item 27 and is among the sponsors of draft resolu- tions A/35/L,52 and Add.l, A/35/L,54 and Add.I, A/35/L,55 and Add.1 and A/35/L,56 and Add.l Our support for all, and eo-sponsorship of some, of these draft resolutions should be reted as a reflexion of our well-known position ding the question of Namibia. 48. However, as regards operative paragraph 24 of draft resolution A/35/L,50 and Add.l , operative para- graph 12 of draft resolution A/35/L,58 and Add.1 and some of the preambular paragraphs of draft resolution A/35/L,59 and Add.I, I should like to put on record that we accept them to the extent that they comply with the general principles underlying our foreign policy and the context of our statement before the Assembly on 4 March [107th meeting]. 49. Mr. BOLE (Fiji): My delegation voted in favour of all the draft resolutions which have been adopted on the question of the international Territory of Namibia. This is because we firmly support the right of the people of Namibia to self-determination and indepen- dence in a united Namibia, in accordance with the appropriate United Nations resolutions, including, in particular, Security Council resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (1978). These resolutions provide the basis for a peaceful solution of the question, 50. We therefore deplore South Africa's failure to implement these resolutions as manifested most

I now call on the representa- tive of the United States, who wishes to speak on behalf of the five Western States.

The Governments of Canada, France, the Federal Republic of-Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States have today abstained on the 10 draft resolutions placed before the General Assembly under agenda item 27. In explanation of the vote I wish to make clear that our collective abstention neither reflects nor implies any judgement on the merits of the various draft resolutions offered. 55. We naturally regret the circumstances that have given rise to this debate. As Sir Anthony Parsons noted in his statement on behalf of the five Western States, "our objective remains to secure a peaceful, internationally recognized settlement" [I09th meeting, para. /24]. Few of the draft resolutions before us contribute to the objective, and we again urge all concerned to look for positive ways forward.

The Gen- eral Assembly this week has been debating agenda item 27, under which draft resolutions A/35/L.50 and Add.1 through A/35/L.59 and Add.l were submitted; their aim was to bring pressure to bear on those forces hindering progress towards the freedom of Namibia. The delegation of the Republic of Zimbabwe has joined hands with all progressive freedom-loving and peace-loving delegations present here in support of all 10 draft resolutions. Zimbabwe was one of the sponsors of draft resolutions A/35/L.51 and Add.I through A/35/L.55 and Add.l, A/35/L.57 and Add.I and A/35/L.58 and Add.l. 57. We supported those draft resolutions because of our total commitment to the liberation and inde- pendence of Namibia from South Africa. However, the delegation of Zimbabwe felt compelled to speak at this stage in order to explain its position regarding operative paragraph 29 of draft resolution A/35/L.50 and Add.l and operative paragraph 13 of draft resolu- tion A/35/L,59 and Add.1 calling upon the Security Council to impose mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa. Although Zimbabwe sees the justification for this call and fully supports the objectives and the demands of sanctions, Zimbabwe feels that because of the historical and geographical 77. If we are commited to independence and self- determination for Namibia, if we do not want to support violence, and if there is little indication of new moves to persuade South Africa, what other course remains? For our part, we can see no option but to accept that the matter should now be referred to the ecurity Council so that the Council itself may consider how to ensure that its own past resolutions are implemented. It is because we viewed this as the main point of draft resolution A/3S/L.59 and Add.l that we decided to vote in favour of it. We regard this vote as an expression of support for a call on the Council to decide on appropriate action. I must, however, make it clear that we reserve our position on the exact terms of the action which the Council may decide to take in relation to South Africa. We agree, however, that the Assembly may call on the Council to impose sanctions, as it does in operative paragraph 13, but it must be for the Council itself, in exercise of its own powers under the Charter and taking account of all the circumstances, to decide whether it should take action and, if so, exactly what action it should take. 78. Finally, as to operative paragraph 14, although we are prepared to consider a special session of the Assembly in due course, we do not wish to prejudge the outcome of the Security Council's consideration of the problem which is now to be referred to it. 79. Mr. SCHELTEMA (Netherlands): I am speaking on behalf of the Netherlands delegation in order to explain the position of my Government on the resolu- tions just adopted by the General Assembly. 80. The Netherlaods is deeply disappointed that the South African Of . "lment has been unwilling to agree to a cease-z..e or to agree to set a date for the implementation of the settlement plan adopted by the 71. There was much in draft resolution A/35/L.58 and Add.l , on the question of Narnibian uranium, with which we agreed. However, we abstained, as we could not support operative paragraph 9, with its reference to the European Atomic Energy Community [EURATOM], or operative paragraph 12, which con- demned selectively four named countries for activities, some of which have been denied. 72. I come now to draft resolution A/35/L.59 and Add.I. We viewed this draft resolution, relating to the situation after the breakdown of the Geneva pre- implementation meeting in January, as particularly important, and we gave very sel::'~JS consideration to the position which we should take in our vote. The draft resolution contains important formulations with which we fully agree. I refer, in particular, to the endorsement of the right of the Namibian people to genuine self-determination. But it also contains formulations which we would find it difficult to endorse. 73. We do not accept the implied criticism of the motives of the Western contact group in the preamble. On the contrary, we think that the five countries concerned deserve credit for their sustained efforts over several years. 74. Furthermore, although we strongly favour Namibian independence, we must also express reserva- 100. Our thoughts go out also to Mr. Kurt Waldheim, who will responsible for the implementation of the many resolutions we have just adopted; we know that he will discharge this lofty task with characteristic dedication, persistence and foresight. The momentum he has imparted to the search for a peaceful and internationally acceptable solution of the Namibian problem in recent years deserves a special tribute from us. 101. At this late stage in our meeting, I shall not dwell on the draft resolutions we have just adopted or on the many statements we have heard in the course of the debate. But it does appear to us necessary to say how surprised and disappointed we are at the negative attitude of a group of countries in the Assembly, in particular the Western countries. By the statement made on their behalf yesterday by the representative of the United Kingdom [J09th meeting] and by the votes they have just cast they have displayed a desire to shirk the responsibility we all have towards the people of Namibia. 102. In the course of the 35 years of conflict between racist South Africa and the rest of the world com- munity, the Western countries have argued that a dialogue must be maintained with the Pretoria regime in order to bring about a peaceful settlement of the Namibian problem, since ostracism U1 that regime would lead to an impasse. We had been told that the settlement plan in Security Council resolution 435 (1978) would be the last attempt to make Pretoria see reason. 103. It was principally out of respect for the framers of the plan that the world community in general, and the African group in particular, finally supported it, while emphasizing its ambiguities and weaknesses and bearing in mind the customary untrustworthiness of the Pretoria racists, 104. To give that initiative all possible chances of succeeding, the General Assembly decided last December to postpone its debate on agenda item 27 until after the meeting convened by the Secretary- General at Geneva with a view to setting dates for a cease-fire in Namibia and for free and democratic elections under the control and supervision of the United Nations. "We do not, of course, preach violence.. but rather an end to all violence, and more particularly an end to the violence done to human dignity uy' the oppressors of Africa. In southern Africa, how- ever, we are faced with the most systematic violence ever seen in human history since the days of nazism. It goe-r without saying that, should our appeals still go unheeded, we shall have no option but to continue to give the African peoples still under domination all the support of which we are capable in their struggle for freedom and independence. The United Nations itself will be unable to continue evading the need to use all means, includi-g force, to safeguard both the human dignity of those peoples and international peace and Security." 3

In accordance with General Assembly resolution 31/152 of 20 December 1976, I now call on the Observer for SWAPO. n7. Mr. GURIRAB (South West Africa People's Organization: I am most grateful that before I asked to be allowed to speak I was able, this morning and again this afternoon, to listen to remarks made by the representatives of India and the United Republic of Cameroon, and a few seconds ago by the representa- tive of Zambia, the President of the United Nations Council for Namibia. Frankly, I had not intended to speak, as I had an opportunity to do so during the 103rd meeting. But I would have failed in my duty if i did not ask to be allowed to speak to place on record the views of the suffering people of Namibia before the adjournment of this meeting. 128. Some people have a nagging proclivity for persistent distortion of the reality of the situation prevailing in Namibia. I am referring to the key repre- sentatives and spokesmen of the military alliances of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] and international monopoly capital. What I have to say may not be diplomatic and may not be according to protocol. But we are honest and sincere; as freedom fighters and revolutionaries we have nothing to hide and, therefore, I shall say the following. 129. Yesterday Sir Anthony Parsons, representative of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern 131. The problem of Namibia, therefore, is a problem of colonial oppression and subjugation, of illegality and of ruthless, illegal exploitation of the human and natural resources of our occupied country by the Pre- toria racists and the major Western countries and their transnational corporations. In this connexion, the report of the United Nations Council for Namibia submitted to the Assembly and referred to by many representatives during the debate, confirmed and further clarified the extent of the plundering of Nami- bian resources. The hearings on the plunder of Namibian uranium organized last year by the United Nations Council for Namibia revealed still further the collusion between the illegal occupying regime and its Western collaborators. Sir Anthony's country is the primary culprit in this uranium axis. 132. For example, we are reliably informed that that country has decided to extend beyond 1982 the con- tractual arrangements whereby it continues to plunder Namibian uranium at Rossing in our country. 133. Although SWAPO also wishes to reaffirm its unabated commitment to searching for a negotiated settlement for Namibia, we firmly believe that the first step in that direction is the ending of the hostilities raging in Namibia by the signing of a cease-fire agree- ment between SWAPO and South Africa, the two warring parties in our country. We reiterated our readiness to sign such an agreement only recently at Geneva; the other side rejected the idea. In this regard, we blame not only the racist regime for its intransigence and prevarication, but we also blame the five Western States for their unwillingness to bring pressure to bear on the Boers. We remain ready to implement Security Council resolution 435 (1978), once the racists agree to the implementation of that resolution. 134. Namibia shall be free, either through armed struggle or through negotiations. We are ready for both. We are not convinced-and we will not allow ourselves to be misled into thinking-that the only way for the Namibian people to realize the objectives of freedom and independence is through a so-called peaceful solution. We remember, for example, for we were taught this, that these United States of America were able to achieve their liberation through armed struggle. That is why the American people proudly celebrate the Fourth of July. Why do they want to deny us that? 137. We note that we are being threatened with the loss oflives and the destruction of property in Namibia. We interpret that to mean that the racists have been enabled militarily to destroy valuable lives and prop- erty in our country, perhaps by nuclear means. We take note of that. 138. We are surprised that, in the statement by Sir Anthony, the five Western States could not even find words to express surprise, shock or dismay at the deliberate wrecking of the Geneva meeting by racist South Africa. Should we conclude that those five States have now reneged on Security Council resolu- tion 435 (1978), which is the product of their initiative? 139. We have come to the General Assembly time and again to dramatize the plight of our people and to galvanize the international community into supporting and assisting our just cause. This afternoon, in no uncertain terms, the overwhelming majority of Mem- ber States renewed their support for, and solidarity with, the heroic struggle of the Namibian people under the leadership of SWAPO, their sole and authentic representative. 140. We are gratified and most grateful. The positive votes cast attest to the legitimacy of our struggle and to the inevitable victory that will surely come as a result of the sacrifices and suffering that we endure today. We were gratified to witness, early in the debate, the rejection of the credentials of the non- representative minority delegation from South Africa. We thank all the delegations which spoke in support of our cause, and we reassure them this afternoon that we shall intensify the armed liberation struggle in Namibia for the early independence of our country. We are ready to continue to talk. We are ready to continue to negotiate, provided that those efforts are aimed at ending the illegal colonial occupation of our country. ,141. In this context, I should like to reassure the United Nations, and particularly the Secretary- General, of our continued readiness to co-operate with him and with his assistants in the common search for genuine independence for Namibia. 142. The struggle continues. The victory is certain. 143. The PRESIDENT: I call on Mr. Lusaka, the President of the United Nations Council for Namibia, who wishes to exercise the right of reply. 144. Mr. LUSAKA, President, United Nations Council for Namibia: I have asked to speak again in order to place on record the right of reply of the

I should like to remind members that the only two items remaining on the Assembly's agenda are the following: agenda item 30, entitled "Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council" and agenda item 123, entitled •• Launching of global negotiations on international economic co-operation for development". I suggest that the Assembly take up these items at a later date after appropriate consulta- tions have been held. 156. The thirty-fifth session of the General Assembly is hereby suspended.