A/36/PV.65 General Assembly

More than two months ago the General Assembly held its eighth emergency special session, to consider the question of Namibia. A number of circum- stances made it necessary for that session to be held, in- cluding the failure of the Security Council to take the necessary decisions because of the use of the veto. An- other reason was the arrogant attitude of the Pretoria re- gime and its refusal to apply the resolutions of the United Nations concerning the independence of Namibia and the exercise by its people of their inalienable rights, in partic- ular its right to self-determination. 11. At that·time the General Assembly adopted resolu- tion ES-8/2, which reflected the position of the interna- tional community on the bases for a settlement of this HA binding determination made by a competent organ of the United Nations to the effect that a situa- tion is illegal cannot remain without consequence. Once the Court is faced with such a situation, it would be failing in the discharge of its judicial functions if it did not declare that there is an obligation, especially upon Members of the United Nations, to bring that sit- uation to an end."* 12. In the light of its activities in connection with de- colonization, and since it is the most highly placed, repre- sentative and democratic body in the United Nations, it" is natural that the General Assembly should assume this his- toric responsibility and free Namibia from the colonialism which we all abhor. 13. A number of years have passed since that advisory opinion was handed down by the International Court of Justice, following which many efforts have been made in the United Nations and outside to arrive at a settlement of the problem. By way of example I might refer to Security Council resolution 435 (1978), which established very ju- dicious and reasonable foundations for guaranteeing the independence of the Territory, and to lite Geneva meeting held in January of this year, in which the various parties to the dispute participated. 14. All these efforts and attempts were doomed to failure because of the stubborn position taken by the Gov- ernment of South Africa, which refused to recognize the rights of the overwhelming majority of the citizens of Namibia. The racist regime of South Africa could cer- tainly not have adopted their arrogant attitude, which flouts the will of the international community, if it had not been able to rely on the military, economic and politi- cal support and assistance given to it, which has enabled it to preserve its economic interests and to .continue to trample underfoot the humanitarian principles and norms of international law which prevent continuing its aggres- sion. 15. In order to put an end to the present situation in southern Africa, it is necessary to ensure immediately the independence of Namibia. The only way the United Na- tions can help to bring about this noble goal is by taking collective measures to force the Government of South Af- rica to implement the United Nations plan endorsed in resolution 435 (1978), without alteration or amendment of any kind. 16. That is why the General Assembly should do every~ thing possible to put an end to any contacts with the Gov- ernment of South Africa to ensure that it is isolated politi- cally, militarily, economically, culturally and as regards sport. The isolation of the Government of South Africa * Quoted in English by the speaker. ~hall thtTefore support any resolutions adopted by the General Assembly with a view to the attainment of this noble objective.

The people of Namibia, under the leadership of its sole authentic representative, SWAPO, for years now ha"s been carrying on a just struggle for freedom and in- dependence. That is an integral part of the struggle of the peoples of southern Africa against racism, colonialism and apartheid, which is supported by all progressive forces in the world. That struggle is being carried on in conditions in which the Pretoria racist regime is intensify- ing repression and continuing to enjoy -the assistance of the forces of imperialism. That is why the problem oT Namibia falls within the framework of the antagonism that exists between the forces of neo-colonialism and the anti-colonialist forces in the world. 19. The right of the people of Namibia to self-determi- nation and independence, and its right to struggle against colonialism in order to achieve that objective has been confirmed in many resolutions of the United Nations, in- cluding that of the eighth emergency special session of the General Assembly, on Namibia, held from 3 to 14 September of this year. Despite those efforts by the inter- national community, the racist Pretoria regime persists in its insolent refusal to abide.by the will of the peoples. There is ample proof of the tragic consequences for the Namibian people of that illegal occupation. 20. The inhuman system of' apartheid established in Namibia by Pretoria serves as a means for safeguarding the interests of the.white exploiter minority' and the cqn- tinued plunder of the natural resources of the country. The Western transnational corporations take part in that plunder on an equal footing witI1 South African corporations, in dis,;, regard of the many' relevant resolutions of the United Nati()ns and Decree No. I for the protection of the natural resources of Namibia, promulgated on 27 September 1974 by the United Nations Council for Namibia.2 21. Certainly such a system can be safeguarded only by means of coercive and repressive measures. There is at present in Namibia a strong occupation force of some 100,000 men who wage a real war against the people. At the same time the escalation of Pretoria's acts of aggres- sion against neighbouring States has reached an extremely dangerous level following the aggression against and con': tinued occupation of parts of Angolan territory. . 22. The imperialists see South Africa and occupied Namibia as a forward post in the struggle against libera- tion movements and independent African States. The ex- isting situation is correctly described in many United Na:. tions resolutions as one· of c011usion between the United States and other Western countries on the one hand and Pretoria on the other. The delegation of the People's Re- public of Bulgaria fully agrees with that assessment. This 23. The attempts to destabilize the Governments of the front-line States have not ceased. In that connection, Pre~ toria acts in concert with certain Western countries on the basis of their common interests. The fact that at a time when aggression against Angola was well under way at- tempts were being made in the United States Congress to repeal the Clark amendment.-which would have enabled assistance to be given to Angolan counter-revolutionary groups-is a clear example of that. At the same time the delegation of the United States in the Security Council blocked adoption of a draft resolution condemning that aggression. And, to complete the picture, we should men- tion the contrast we find between the warm attitude of the United States Administration towards the Pretoria racists and the fact that SWAPO, which is recognized by the United Nations as the sole authentic representative of the Namibian people, is described as a "terrorist" organiza- tion. 24. Many years have passed since the Security Council adopted the United Nations plan aimed at a solution of the Namibian problem, which is approved in its resolu- tions 385 (1976) and 435 (1978). While adopting a posi- tion of obstruction and procrastination, Pretoria has cre- ated puppets and organized illegal elections intended to provide'a neo-colonialist solution to the problem, chang- ing the fonn without changing the content of the situation obtaining in Namibia. 25. In January of this year the racists openly defied world public opinion by causing the failure of the Geneva meeting. Once again, it was the Western countries penna- nent members of the Security Council which saved them from the adoptiod by the Security·Council of enforcement measures under Chapter VII of the Charter. We seriously doubt that in so doing those countries were moved by their desire to assist the Namibian people and to contrib- ute to a solution of the question in its interests. On the other hand, co-operation between Washington and Pretoria in many areas continues to increase. 26. The United Nations has stressed several times that South Africa's policy constitutes a direct threat to interna- tional peace and security. The nuclear potential of the apartheid regime only increases the already extreme se- riousness of that threat. In that context, it is even more curious that the so-called contact group continues to try to change the United Nath>ns plan instead of trying to ensure its strict and rapid implementation. 27. This year the United Nations Council for Namibia, as the legal Administrating Authority for Namibia, has worked actively for the denunciation of the policy of Pan2!D~ peelaration and Programme of Action on Namibia LA/36/24, para. 222], were of great importance. Those two documents contain a precise evaluation of the &ituation in Namibia and point the way towards a solution of the problem. 28. The delegation of the People's Republic of Bulgaria fully supports the report of the United Nations Council for Namibia and the conclusions and recommendations contained therein [seeA/36/24]. My country, which is an active member of the Council, considers that the United Nations plan continues, without any modification, qualifi- cation or prevarication, to serve as a basis for the compre- hensive settlement of the question. We believe that the United Nations has assumed, and will continue to as- sume, responsibility for the people of Namibia .until its accession to complete and legitimate independence. Any attempt to settle that problem outside the framework of the world Organization is contrary to the interests of the Namibian people and its right to self-detennination and independence. My delegation wishes to reaffinn itsfinn position in favour of the immediate cessation of the illegal occupation and the withdrawal of South Africa's admin- istration from Namibia, including Walvis Bay and the off- shore islands, as well as the immediate transfer of power to the sole and authentic representative of its people, SWAPO. We unreservedly support the armed struggle of Namibia. 29. In the view of the Bulgarian delegation, the surest way to force the racists to abide by United Nations reso- lutions is to impose comprehensive economic sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter. Guided by that position of principle, my Government and the people of the Peo- pie's Republic of Bulgaria will' continue to lend their as- sistance in many ways to the struggling people of Namibia until complete victory.

Only a few weeks ago, at the 4th meeting of the eighth special emergency session, devoted to the question of Namibia, I had the opportunity to present in detail Austria's position on this issue, which is now again the subject of a debate. This position has remained unchanged over the years during which the United Nations has been devoting increased attention to the issue, and there is no reason to repeat it today. Suffice it to say that Austria has consistently associated itself. with the United Nations plan for Namibia's peaceful and negotiated transition to independence as the most promis- ing way of ending South Africa's' illegal occupation of the Territory and fulfilling the inherent right of the Namibian people to self-detennination, independence and the free and unrestricted exercise of their political will. 31. In'the view of the Austrian Government, any politi- cal settlement aimed at stability and durability has to rest on the broadest possible basis comprising all the parties engaged in the problem. The United Nations plan, origi- nally put forward by the five Western Powers' and subse- quently endors~d by the Security Council in resolution 435 (1978), meets these basic requirements. It provides for true self-determination on the basis of democratic and internationally supervised elections and consiitutes the only feasible way for the United Nations to discharge its 33. As I have said, resolution 435 (1978) is, and must continue to be, the basis and the established guideline for Namibia's transition to independence. It is, however, a declaration of principle, and, in its implementation we must allow for the necessary leeway and flexibility in ac- commodating new additional proposals if they are de- signed to promote the cause of independence for Namibia and meet with the approval of the parties most directly concerned. 'When one looks at the most recent develop- ments and tries to assess them, there is, above all, one factor which has to be borne in mind, that is, whether they will truly benefit the Namibian people, who have been deprived of their most basic national rights for over 60 years. 34. On that basis, Austria would have appredated a pOstponement of the present debate until a date when a clearer and more correct in-depth assessment of these re- cent developments had been possible...We would now ap- preciate it if the General Assembly did not take any deci- sion which might have harmful effects on the delicate construction of an agreement and might unnecessarily em- bitter. the climate in which negotiations take place. 35. Before concluding, I should like to take this oppor- tunity to express our appreciation and gratitude to the five Western Powers and to' the Secretary-General, his Special Renresentative and his advisers for their unswerving efforts to implement the plan, as well as to SWAPO and the Governments of the front-line States, which, in a spirit of co-operation and understanding, have participated in and advanced this endeavour. Special appreciation is also due to the United Nations Council for Namibia, which, under the experienced and wise guidance of Mr. Lusaka, represents the interests of the Namibian people with skill and devotion and promotes their cause in world public opinion.

The Norwegian Gov- ernment has consistently shared the view that only a polit- ical solution can bring about Namibia's independence and, thus create the necessary peace and stability in the region . of southern Africa. This is important not only for the people of Namibia but also for the future economic and social development of all the new States in the area. 37. We have therefore supported the initiative of the Western contact group which led to the adoption of Se- curity Council resolution 435 (1978) as the best way to achieve a settlement. 39. This development has taken a heavy toll of the civil- ian population in the area. Humanitarian assistance is therefore one area in which the international community can make a concrete contribution to al!eviatin,g, the suffer- ing of the people concerned. The Norwegian Govern- ment, for its part, is involved in a number of United Nations and bilateral programmes designed to meet the needs of the refugees. For the work among refugees from Namibia specifically, the Government has granted 21 mil- lion Norwegian kroner-approximately $3.5 million-for the present year. We intend to continue and to strengthen these efforts. 40. The escalation of the warfare in southern Africa un- derlines, in our opinion, the urgent need for a political solution. The Norwegian Government therefore welcomed the announcement that the Western contact group would make a new effort to see if it was stilI possible to find common ground for the implementation of the United Na- tions plan. We understand that the delegation from the contact group which recently visited the capitals in the area presented some proposals and suggestions on how resolution 435 (1978) could be supported and supple- mented. These proposals, if they proved acceptable to the parties concerned, would also serve as important confi- dence-building measures for the next phases of ttte on- going consultations. 41. The Norwegian Government feels that thi~ renewed effort should be ,given encouragement and support by the United Nations. We see no other viable alternative if we still want to see the United Nil#ons plan implemented'. 42. In conclusion, the Norwegian delegation would like to express its admiration for the Secretary-General and his staff, in particular the United Nations Commissioner for Namibia, .for their untiring efforts to' identify and solve the remaining problems concerning the United Nations plan. We would also like to pay tribute to the front-line States and SWAPO for their constructive attitude through- out this long and difficult negotiating process. We share their hope that the people of Namibia will soon be able to enjoy their freedom and independence.

This is the third time in the space of only nine months that the question of Namibia ha~ been taken up by the General Assembly. This is unpreceden+~d. It reveals the exceptional seriousness of the topic we are now dis~ cussing, the increasingly tense and explosive situation in southern Africa, which quite properly .\S a matter of con- cern to Member States. Such a situation tests not only the ability of the Organization to act in order to implement its own unanimously accepted decisions, bat also its capacity to intervene promptly and efficiently when international peace, stability and security ~ threatened. . 44. Obviously, what we need to do is to take a responsi- ble look at all the aspects of the situation and to adopt measures wittiout delay which will make it possible for 45. The need for a politica~ settlement of the question of Namibia is a matter of general consensus among the States Members of the Organization. The General Assem- bly has frequently had occasion to denounce and con- demn the continued occupation of Namibia and to request the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of South M- rica's armed forces and administration from this Territory in order that the people of Namibia may freely exercise its right to choose for itself its course of social and eco- nomic development in a free, undivided and independent homeland. 46. The will of Member States was reflected in the full support given to Security Council resolution 435 (1978), which approved a plan on the accession to independence by Namibia through the organization of free and demo- cratic elections under the supervision and control of the United Nations, ~_ ~ the efforts which have been made to give effect to that resolution. South Africa continues to defy those efforts. Throughout the three years of negotia- tions aimed at ensuring the implementation of resolution 435 (1978), South Africa has continued to put obstacles in the way of the accession by Namibia to genuine inde- pendence. It has become quite clear that for South Africa these negotiations are simply an excuse in order to gain time to further its destabilizing activities in the region, to serve its expansionist designs and its intention to maintain its domination over Namibia, and to impose a neo-colo- nialist type of solution on that country. 47. The repeated and overt attempts of South Africa to block the efforts of the United Nations to bring about the independence of Namibia not only prove the lack of good faith of the South African racist regime in the negotia- tions, but also reveal the true objectives which are being pursued by the Pretoria authorities in southern Africa. 48. The policy of cynical defiance of the most elemen- tary norms of international law has also taken the form of numerous acts of aggression committed by.the Pretoria racists against neighbouring African countries; these acts, which have recently taken the form of large-scale aggres- sive military operations against Angola, thus seriously threatening international peace and security, have been ve- hemently condemned by the Romanian Government and people and by the overwhelming majority of Member States. The fact that the Security Council has been unable to take the necessary steps to deal with these premedi- tated acts of aggression by South Africa against Angola has aroused general disappointment and disapproval. 49. These actions of t the South African racist regime could not fail to cause legitimate concern among the inter- national community. They justify increasingly resolute de- mands by Member States that the Organization proceed to adopt the measures provided for in the Charter to restore international legality and to induce South Africa to abide by the resolutions of the United Nations and evacuate the Territory of Namibia. 50. The continuing Illegal occupation of Namibia, the intensification of repression of Namibian patriots, the mil- itarization of the Territory and its use as a base for ag- gressive acts by the South African racists against neigh- 51. We believe that,even more than in the past, the interests of the peace and security of the whole world re- quire the adoption of firm measures by the United Na- tions and all Member States resolutely and swiftly to im- plement the resolutions of the Organization aimed at ending the illegal occupation of Namibia and ensuring the realization of the rights of the Namibian people to self- determination and independence. 52. As we are deeply wedded to the cause of peace and international ~ecurity and to the cause of national libera- tion, Romania is particularly concerned about South M- rica's attempts ~o prevent the Namibian people from exer- cising their inID~enable right to a free and sovereign existence and to prevent Namibia's accession to indepen- dence. 53. The position of my country, which has always sup- ported the heroic national liberation struggle waged by the Namibian people, under the leadership of SWAPO, as well as the efforts of the United Nations to discharge the special responsibilities it has directly assumed vis-a.-vis Namibia, has often been reaffirmed in the General As- sembly during its regular and emergency special sessions, as well as in the Security Council. This position .has been described in detail during the contacts that Romania has had with States in various parts of the world, with a view to mobilizing Namibia's accession to independence. 54. The Romanian delegation has repeatedly reaffirmed the militant solidarity of Romania and its people with the just struggle of the Namibian people, under the leadership of SWAPO, to end the occupation of Namibia and fulfil their aspirations to freedom and progress, their right to choose for themselves the way in which they will achieve economic development, with complete independence and sovereignty. 55. We have vigorously condemned the continued oc- cupation of Namibia, the obstructionist position of the Pretoria authorities aimed at sabotaging the United Na- tions plan for granting independence to Namibia, the ma- noeuvres intended to perpetuate the most retrograde forms of colonial domination and apartheid on the African con- tinent, and the acts of aggression carried out by the South African racists against Angola and other independent Af- rican States, and we have vigorously demanded that steps be taken to restore international legality.. 56. As we also emphasized during the 4th meeting of the eighth emergency special session of the General Assembly, devoted to Namibia, the Romanian delegation considers that resolute action should be taken to put an end to South Africa's opposition and the obstacles that it 57. While encouraging and promoting a peaceful settle- ment of the Namibian problem, we cannot fail to draw attention to the rigid and odious policies of the Pretoria authorities, their manoeuvres to delay the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978), their illegal ac- tivities in Namibia designed to perPetuate South Africa's domination, activities which have even been stepped up despite the continuing process of a peaceful settlement of the Namibian problem. We have always believed, and we continue to believe, that the Namibian people are entitled to use all political, diplomatic and other means-includ- ing armed struggle-to end foreign domination and fulfil their aspirations to freedom, independence and progress. 58. Romania believes that, as was emphasized in the message 'sent by President Nicolae Ceausescu to the Presi- dent of SWAPO on 25 August this year, on the fifteenth aItniversary of Namibia Day: " ... there is an imperative need to speed up, as well as to intensify, the struggle of the Namibian peo- ple and to strengthen'the efforts of all the democratic and anti-imperialist forces and international public opinion to put an end as soon as possible to South Africa's domination and to ensure Namibia's accession to national independence". That being so, we believe that it is the duty of the Gen- eral Assembly and the Security Council to heed the de- mands of the international community and to take ener- getic steps, by resorting to the provisions of the Charter, to remove the obstacles preventing the Namibian people from exercising their rights to a free and sovereign exis- tence. 59. We believe that the present session should focus on intensifying the support given by the United Nations to the ju~t struggle of the Namibian people. 60. The Romanian people, who have for centuries been waging a struggle full of sacrifices for their national and social liberation, have from the outset shown militant soli- darity with and given their full support to the political, diplomatic and armed struggle being waged by the people of Namibia, under the leadership of SWAPO, to win their undeniable right to a free and dignified life. Socialist Ro- mania and the Romanian people will continue to support as far as they can the struggle of the Namibian people to throw off the yoke of foreign domination and achieve their aspirations to freedom, independence and progress, in the fmn conviction that that struggle will soon be crowned with success. 6i. Romania is firmly resolved to continue in the future to act in close collaboration with the African countries, other non-aligned and developing countries, and all States , wedded to the noble aims of the Charter, to ensure that the Namibian people can realize without delay their right to a n:ee, united and sovereign country, so that Namibia may as soon as possible take the place that belongs to it among the free nations of the world, among the Member States of the United Nations, and make its own contribu- tion to the efforts of the international community to fur- ther peace and detente and to build a better and fairer world. 63. However, there have been no real signs of any pro- gress towards guaranteeing the Namibian people their in- alienable right to self-determination and independence. On the contrary, the situation in southern Africa continues to be exacerbated. The South African racists are stub- bornly continuing their attempts to maintain domination over Namibia, which they have illegally occupied, and are expanding their aggressive actions against independent African States. 64. In those actions the racist regime of Pretoria is rely- ing on the full sympathy and direct support of the United States- and a number of other member States of NATO. 65. In that connection, we should like to dwell on the reasons for South Africa's reluctance to leave Namibia and the motives which have prompted leading Western Powers to condone the illegal occupation of that Territory and thus assist the racist regime of Pretoria. The I;!ssence of the m~tter, as has been frequently repeated from Unittu Nations rostrums, is the interrelationship of the; strategic, political and economic interests of the most aggressive militarist circles in the West, powerful transnational cor- porations and the South African racists and their common desire to continue to utilize Namibia as a beach-head against neighbouring African States, in order to streqgthen the anti-human system of apartheid arid to plunder the richest mineral resources of Namibia. 66. As the report of the United Nations Council for Namibia indicates, there are 88 transnational corporations operating in the Territory. Thirty-five of them are based in South Africa and 53 are based in countries of the so- called, Western contact group-25 in the United King- dom, 15 in the United States $ eight in the Federal Re- public of Germany, three in France and two in Canada. . 67. The Pretoria regime establishes for foreign mining companies operating in Namibia even lower taxation rates than those established in South Africa itself. It allows them to write off capital expenses from their current gross profits and to carry out unlimited surveying of the miner- als, and it does not require those minerals to be processed on the spot. Because of the possibility of earning these immense profits as a result of the unbridled exploitation of the indigenous population and because of the over·ex- ploitation of minerals, foreign economic circles are sup- porting the Pretoria regime's illegal occupation of Namibia both politically and financially. 68. In the Declaration of the Conference in Solidarity with the Liberation Struggles of the Peoples of Southern Africa, which was held in New York from 9 to 11 October this year, attention was drawn to the further expansion of economic co-operation between the United States and the Pretoria regime. The Declaration states: "The growth of this highly exploitive economIc sys- tem has been vitally aided by the impouring of foreign capital, particularly dollars from the United States. In "The United States has passed Great Britain and West Germany to become South Africa's most impor- tant trading partner, seiIing some $2.4 billion in machinery, chemicals, ind~strial and military tech- nology, etc., to South Africa in 1980 and buying over $3.3 billion from them." 69. The United Nations Council for Namibia has em- phasized in its report that: ". . . the illegal regime of South Africa continued its military build-up by intensifying its production and importation of arms and military equipment, by ex- panding and increasing its military bases and installa- tions throughout Namibia, and by recruiting and de- ploying local armed forces as well as mercenaries fr~m Western and other countries. This massive build-up of the South African military machine and repressive ap- paratus, together with the acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability designed to suppress resistance by the oppressed people and terroilze neighbouring Af- rican States, poses a grave menace to humanity". [See A/36/24, para. 535.] 70. In order to maintain its illegal occupation of Namibia, South Africa continues to rely mainly on for- eign sources of supply of military equipmeilt and tech- niques. On the other hand, the main purpose of the strate- gic policies lying behind the investments of South Africa is to achieve self-sufficiency in weapons production. 71. The assistance of Western Powers has made it possi- ble, according to the United Nations Secretariat, for South Africa to produce 70 to 90 per cent of its military equipment. Many frrms in the United States and other Western countries have created local affiliates in South Africa, and the arms embargo is not applied to them. 72. Particular concern has been caused to the interna- tional community by the co-operation which, as the United Nations Council for Namibia has shown, is being carried out by the United States with the apartheid re- gime and also by the United Kingdom, France and the Federal Republic of Germany, as well as by Belgium, Is- rael, Japan, the Netherlands and Switzerland. Such co- operation includes assistance in mining, uranium enrich- ment, the supply of nuclear equipment, the transfer of technology and training and exchange of scientists. 73. One of the recent links in this chain of co-operation was the visit to South Africa in October of this year of a group of four American specialists representing the Gov- ernment of the United States. in order to hold talks on the supply of nuclear fuel. 74. By relying on the assistance and support of the Western Powers, the racists in Pretoria have quite recently taken further steps to expand their military presence in Namibia. According to available data, there are more than 100,000 South African soldiers and officers in Namibia. That amounts to 10 per cent of the population of the Ter- ritory. These forces are being used in order to create an atmosphere of terror and fear in that~ illegally occupied Territory of Namibia, to impose on its people a so-called internal settlement in order to perpetuate the anti-human system of apartheid and South Africa's domination over 75. The crowning point of United States political and diplomatic co-operation and complicity between the United States and other members of the so-called contact group of the Western countries in connection with the Pretoria racist regime's illegal occupation of Namibia was the threefold veto of the United States, the United King- dom and France, which, in April of this year, helped to protect the South African racists from the comprehensive mandatory sanctions that had once again been demanded by the international community, last January, after Pre- toria had broken off the Geneva talks on Namibia. That was followed by the United States veto that prevented the Security Council from adopting a resolution which would have condemned South Africa for its aggression against Angola. The continuing and expanding co-operation of the United States and certain other Western States with the Pretoria regime is the root cause of the fact .that the problem of Namibia has remained for many years now one of the most acute unsolved international problems. The alarm and indignation at that co-operation expressed by a number of States, particularly African States, are reflected in the resolution on Namibia adopted at the thirty-seventh ordinary session of the Council of Ministers of the Organization of African Unity, held at Nairobi fr9m 15 to 26 June of this year. That resolution con- demned the overt or covert collusion of certain Western countries, in particular the United States of America, with the South African racists, which has obstructed the efforts of the international community to compel the Pretoria regime to vacate Namibia. The resolution denounced "the emerging unholy alliance between Pretoria and Wash- ington characterized by baseless hostility against Angola and their collusion to intensify acts of destabilization in that country as well as to misrepresent the nature of the colonial conflict in Namibia as one of the global strategic considerations" [A/36/534, annex I, CM/Res. 853 (XXXVII), para. 12]. The Council of Ministers expressed •'its profound dismay as regards the demonstrated unwill- ingness by certain members of the contact group to carry on with the implementation process, which it has itself initiated, and to exert the necessary pressure on the racist Pretoria regime to force it to comply with Security Coun- cil resolutions 435 and 439" [ibid., para. 10]. It also rejected "the latest sinister schemes by certain members of the Western contact group, in particular the United States of America, aimed at forcing the international community to abandon Security Council resolution 435 endorsing the United Nations Plan for the Independence of Namibia, and depriving the oppressed Namibian peo- ple of their hard-won victories in the struggle for national liberation" [ibid., para. 9]. . 76. The Soviet delegation subscribes to the just criti- cisms that have been made of the policies of the Western Powers with regard to the Namibian issue by both African and other States which favour the liberation of the Nami- bian people and the cessation of the illegal occupation of Namibia by the racist regime of Pretoria, which has fre- quently been described by the United Nations as a serious threat to international peace and security. In this connec- tion we attach great significance to the statements made this morning [64th meetiyg] by the President of the United Nations Council fot Namibia, Mr. Paul Lusaka of Zambia, and by the Chairman of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration of the Granting of Independence to Colonial imposs~ble to satisfy the demand of the United Nations that independence be granted to Namibia. 79. The Soviet Union's position on the question of Namibia remains clear-cut and consistent. It is our belief that the long-suffering people of Namibia, as well as other peoples still under the domination of colonizers and racists, should immediately gain freedom and indepen- dence and be granted an opportu'.'ity for independent na- tional development. 80. We favour a speedy solution of the Namibian prob- lem on ,the basis of the preservation of the unity and ter- ritorial integrity of Namibia, including Walvis Bay. We favour the full withdrawal from Namibia of the troops and ddministration of South Africa, and a complete transfer of administrative power to the people of Namibia, that is to the people's organization, S\VAPO, which has been recog- nized by the United Nations and the Organization of Af- rican Unity as the sole authentic representative of the Namibian people. We are prepared to make our contribu- tion as well to a just political settlement of the Namibian problem under the aegis of the United Nations. For such a settlement to be possible, it is essential that an end be put immediately to the constant equivocation and ma- noeuvring. The Security Council should impose on the South African racists the strictest and most comprehensive sanctions, as provided for in Chapter vrr of the Charter of the United Nations. 81. As the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union, Mr. A. A. Gromyko, said from this very rostrum during the present s6ssion, "It is a matter of honour and is the immediate duty of the United Nations to help the people of Namibia gain their freedom. The racists and all those on whom they rely must realize that the time of colonialism is past". [7th meeting, para. 156.]

I should like to begin my statement by' 84. African colleagues in ibis and other forums have bitterly recalled that in 1978 they had to accept conces- sion after concession on the appeal of those same Powers in order to accommodate South Africa, as they said. And this year:. given the clearly negative results of four years of goodwill cynically wasted, those colleagues have justly denounced what they consider to be the intransigence, the unilateral imposition, the duplicity and the about-face of South Africa and, to say the least, the "connivance, the procrastination and the diversionary tactics" which are used as one more subterfuge by the five Western Powers, which continue to evade their moral obligation to prevail upon their South African ally strictly to apply the political solution that was accepted by all the parties concerned. The entire world is aware of the particularly harmful role and the arrogant attitude of the new American Admin- istration, which continues to main~in its friendship with South Africa, which it calls its pennanent ally, and which is at present working to undennine the 2greed solution and to replace it by a new arrangement more to its liking and more to the advantage of its racist friends. Together with all progressive mankind, many delegations, includ- ing my own, share the feelings of the African delegations which have clearly expressed from this rostrum their frus- tration, their anger and their indignation. 85. Public opinion is right to show its indignation be- cause for four years, behind the smoke-screen of the so- called negotiations, the authorities of Pretoria have not ceased to consolidate their illegal occupation and their colonialist and racist domination over Namibia, in order to perpetuate it. They have opened up the Territory fur- ther to the exploitation and plunder of the transnational corporations. They have stepped up the r~cruitment of mercenaries and the training of tribal armed forces in their pay. They have strengthened their military establish- .ments and the network of bases and expanded the system of bantustanization and the creation of puppet parties and administrations, justly described by SWAPO as 'instruments of the neo-colonialism of South Africa and its protectors. At the same time, the Pretoria authorities llntensify their repression of the population. and otheir attacks against the political leaders and armed organization of SWAPO, thus showing their vain desire to eliminate the sole authentic representative of the Namibian people. They also di:r,ect their armed aggression against the front-line States, par- 86. Given these clear facts, the time has come for everyone to draw his own conclusions.· Representatives of different African countries have assessed the situation as critical, truly critical, and have said that it is high time a decision was reached. Progressive mankind, together with free Africa, demands that effective mealiures and concrete action be taken. 87. In many forums, including that of the eighth emer- gency. special session of the General Assembly, a ftnn stand has been taken in favour of comprehensive mandatory sanctions against the racist regime of Pretoria, and its complete political isolation. It has not been possible to implement those sanctions because of the vetoes of the Western Powers, led by the United States. The time has come to ask them clearly the following question in order to prevent them from shirking their responsibilities. Which of the five countries is determined to put pressure on South Africa to apply strictly resolution 435 (1978) and, if it does not, declare itself in favour of the applica- tion of sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter? Which, on the other hand, by giving an evasive answer to that question, places itself at the side of Pretoria as the enemy of Africa and all mankind? 88. Given the uncertainty of the moment with regard to the politi,,=al solution of the problem to which SWAPO remains open-but only on the strict basis of resolution 435 (1978) without any prevarication, qualification or modification whatsoever-SWAPO, which has clearly dis- played its goodwill and its sense of responsibility, has stated that it will intensify its national liberation struggle at all levels, including armed struggle, which many reso- lutions of the United Nations have declared to be legiti- mate. No one could find fault with that; all States that cherish justice a."1d freedom, all progressive mankind, must agree with that and give SWAPO their sympathy and support. 89. At this crucial time, within the framework of the United Nations, resolution ES-8/2, adopted by the Gen- eral Assembly at its eighth emergency special session, au- thoritatively endorsing the Programme of Action on Namibia drawn up in Panama [A/36/24, para. 222], set out what I consid~r to be sensible guidelines, which many statements by delegations, and in particular those of the Secretary for Foreign Relations of SWAPO and the Presi- dent of the United Nations Council for Namibia, have made more precise and amplified. Those statements are fully supported by my delegation, and we would like to emphasize the aspects which we consider to be the most important. 90. The tasks with which the problem of Namibia con- fronts the Organization are immense and most varied. We should focus our efforts on key tasks, essential tasks, which :.1 our view result from the two principles included in all decisions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, namely: on the one hand unswerving support for the struggle of the Namibian people, in all its aspects and in all the forms which that people may consider necessary to ensure the victory of its just cause; and on the other hand recognition of SWAPO as being the sole authentic representative of that people. ~nd miEtary struggle, the consolidation and development of its political forces, its armed forces and their activities. The international community must consequently direct its assistance to the struggle of the Namibian people along these lines and the United Nations Council for Namibia, which is responsible for mobilizing and co-ordinating this assistance, will see that that is done. 92. Faced with the manoeuvres of South Africa, sup- ported by international corporations, to install a neo-colo- nial puppet regime by means of a so-called internal settle- ment, the United Nations confirmed by its decisions and acts the position of principle which it has always main- tained: That SWAPO is the sole and legitimate representa- tive of the Namibian people; that it must be a participant, and the only participant, as the representative of Namibia in the preparation and implementation of any political so- lution to r.ie problem of Namibia. Consequently, puppet parties Ol organizations such as the Democratic Thrnhalle Alliance cannot be admitted to any debate or negotiation on Namibia either through the front door or through the service entrance. 93. Mandatory comprehensive sanctions, the urgency of which was stressed in resolution ES-8/2, remain an objec- tive yet to be attained. While waiting for the Security Council to adopt a decision to that effect, the mobiliza- tion of public opinion, particularly in the Western coun- tries which are partners of South Africa, could have an influence on their respective Governments and to a certain extent limit the criminal relations of the latter with the Pretoria regime. 94. Another important point in the Programme of Ac- tion on Namibia has the full agreement and support of my delegation: it concerns the political, diplomatic, financial, economic and military assistance to front-line States. Those States have made great sacrifices for the principle of solidarity in the struggle of peoples for their liberation. They deserve our admiration and respect. In the face of the alliance between the imperialist, racist and Zionist forces, collective colonialism and transnational corpora- tions, the General Assembly must reaffirm certain rele- vant principles contained in the annex to resolution 2625 (XXV), principles that affirm the tight of peoples, in the conquest of the right of self-determination, to seek and accept all assistance and support in keeping with the Charter; and the consequent right of other States as a mat- ter of honour to respond to that appeal by peoples strug- gling for their national liberation, including the heroic people of Namibia. 95. The people and the Government of the Socialist Re- public of Viet Nam are happy at the new victories of the Namibian people under the leadership of SWAPO, notably the success achieved this year in the armed offensives in various areas-as has been recognized in the South Af- rican newspaper Windhoek Observer-as well as at the failure of the recent manoeuvres by Pretoria to bring the puppets together. We welcome their resolve to fight until their objectives have been attained, as expressed in this statement of the Secretary of Foreign Relations of SWAPO: 96. We wish to assure the people of Namibia and SWAPO again that they enjoy the firm and continuous support of Viet Nam in all circumstances, and until final victory. In particular, within the United Nations, Viet Nam will support the draft resolutions recommended by the United Nations Council for Namibia and submitted to this session of the General Assembly [ibid., para. 708], and pledge~ its full support for every effort the Organiza- tion may make to hasten the inevitable day when the cou- rageous people of Namibia will achieve its full indepen- dence and take its just place in the community of free and sovereign nations.

Australia's commit- ment to the achievement by Namibia of early, genuine and complete independence is absolute. For too long the international community has been calling upon the Gov- ernment of South Africa to cease its illegal occupation of the Territory and to implement immediately the terms of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). 98. In a manner which we have come to expect, but none the less deplore, the South African Government has raised obstacle after obstacle to the effective implementa- tion of the will of the international community. 99. Namibia will be free, and the Government of South Africa should realize that the longer it delays the granting of independence to the Namibian people the greater will be the cost to South Africa itself. If there is one thing that history has taught us over the last 30 years, it is that foreign domination cannot long withst~d the struggle of a people for independence. 100.- During the 9th meeting of the eighth emergency spe~:al.session, on Namibia, I outlined in detail my Gov- em'nent's position on this question. I do not need to re- peat those arguments again now. As I said at the outset, Australia's commitment to an independent Namibia is total. . 101. Australia is a member of the United Nations Coun- cil for Namibia and takes an active part in its work. It is therefore a matter of regret to my Government that parts of the draft resolutions prepared by the Council and now before the General Assembly contain formulations which do nothing to assist and could impede genuine efforts by others to achieve a settlement. While there are a number of formulations with which my delegation has difficulties, I should like to concentrate at this time on a single aspect. 102. The Western contact group has recently concluded a further round of consultations with the front-line States, South Africa, SWAPO and the internal parties. These consultations have been aimed at achieving what we all want-the early implementation of Security Council reso- lution 435 (1978). The Australian delegation commends the contact group for its continuing efforts and urges it to intensify them. We join those other delegations which de- plore the delays in the implementation of resolution 435 (1978); but we recognize that, at least for the present, the efforts of the five Western countries are the only con- structive and realistic efforts towards a settlement which 103. If the contact group had discontinued its efforts or had done nothing to pursue its aims we should have re- garded the criticism of it as valid. But this is not the situation. It has continued its efforts in good faith. It has received the co-operation of the front-line States. The Australian delegation therefore finds it a matter of great regret that the draft resolutions now before the General Assembly do not pay due regard to the importance and potential of these latest developments. 104. For this reason and for others recorded in full in the Council for Namibia and at previous sessions of the General Assembly Australia is unable to support all the draft resolutions contained in the report of the Council. 105. As a member of the Council for Namibia, Aus- tralia would have strongly desired to be able to vote in favour of all the draft resolutions prepared by the Coun,,: cH. The fact that we are not able so to vote should not be interpreted as indicating any change in Australian policy or any lessening in our commitment to an independent Namibia. We will continue to work for a speedy and just solution to the Namibian problem, and we urge that the contact group be allowed to do likewise.

On behalf of my delegation, I should like first of all warmly to congratulate Antigua and Barbuda, which has just been admitted as the one hundred fifty-seventh Mem- ber of the United Nations. We would assure the delega- tion of this new State of the readiness of the delegation of Chad to co-operate with .it. • . . 107. My delegation would like to make a contribution to the discussion on the item before us, which is perhaps not the most controversial case of decolonization but which undoubtedly has been of most concern to the Organization in recent years, namely, the question of Namibia. . 108. In this connection we should like warmly to con- gratulate the United Nations Council for Namibia, the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Im- plementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Inde- pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and the Sec- retary-General for the extremely valuable reports they have submitted to us. 109. Despite the eighth emergency special session of the General Assembly held in September, South Africa has not yet shown any intention to put an end to its ille- gal colonialist presence in Namibia. On the contrary, it has since been constantly stepping up its acts of repres- sion aimed at perpetuating its presence on Namibian soil. That is why we are again here today to see where we stand and to ascertain what further steps need to be I taken. Together we have to assess the nature and the scope of a challenge such as the Organization has never faced before. 110. Not only is the backward racist regime of South Africa flouting the various relevant United Nations resolu- tions but, in order to maintain its domination over Namibia, it is also continuing to perpetrate acts of savage aggression against the front-line States, believing that it can in this way force them to withdraw their support for SWAPO. For example, quite recently,. after the visit of th~ Ill. Indeed, it is a matter of public record that the Se- curity Council has been prevented froin implementing any decision to apply selective sanctions against South Africa because the veto has been systematically used by certain permanent members, which in so doing, are pursuing but one goal: to maintain at all costs an anachronistic system which has been condemned, in order to continue to dem- onstrate in the region the virtues of the superiority of a certain.civilization. 112. The question of Namibia would already have been settled had not the economic sanctions decided upon by the Security Council in its resolution 253 (1968) become mere pious hopes because of the actions of those perma- nent members. We know that it is thanks to them that the South African racists today.possess a nuclear capability that makes it possible for them to persist in their de- fiance. No one would still be speaking of an occupied or dependent Namibia if Security Council resolutions 385 (1976), 431 (1978) and, above all, 439 (1978) had been duly implemented. We have reached this pass because the Western countries have tremendous interests in South Af- rica and could not countenance any action which would harm that country. 113. There can be no doubt that the only peaceful way of leading Namibia to independence is through the com- prehensive implementation of the United Nations plan on Namibia endorsed in resolution 435 (1978). But if that does not come to pass, we should then muster all our strength to give SWAPO, the sole legitimate representative of the Namibian people, all the assistance it needs to con- tinue its armed struggle until final victory. 114. We shouid like here to draw the attention of the members of the contact group to the initiatives of South Africa, which, in order to ensure the political survival of its brain-child, the puppet Democratic Turnhalle Alliance, has suggested that they negotiate a form of constitution to the liking of the Namibian people. We consider that the form of institutions is an internal affair for each country to decide; consequently, it is for the people of Namibia, after independence, to form these institutions in accord- ance with its aspirations. 115. Resolution 435 (1978) has been accepted by SWAPO at the cost of enormous sacrifice. In my delega- tion's view, there can be no question of entertaining any amendment which would further weaken it, to the detri- mentof the Namibian cause. It is obvious that that is the purpose of attempts purportedly to strengthen the docu- ment. This manoeuvre has been inspired by the apartheid regime, which hopes in this way to secure the participa- tion of the so-called Turnhalle Alliance in the negotiations on Namibian independence. 116. In any case, the Government of Chad recognizes SWAPO as the sole legitimate representative of the Nami- bian people. Hence my delegation would condemn out- right any manoeuvre designed to deprive SWAPO of any of its prerogatives in the forthcoming negotiations. We de- plore the decision of the contact group to take up the question of Walvis Bay only after the independence of

Once again the General Assembly is debating the question of Namibia. In truth, the time for debate has long since passed. For the question of Namibia has been dealt with many times in the past, in terms that are clear and unequivocal. The answer has been given by the Assembly; the answer has been confIrmed by the International Court of Justice; the answer has been reiterated by the Security Council. But one nation has had the gall and the intransigence to ignore all this, regrettably with some encouragement from a few others, and in this light the question before us has ceased to be the question of Namibia and has become instead the question of the United Nations: that is, whether the resolutions of the Assembly, the Security Council, the International Court of Justice-the United Nations, in fact-are fit only for the archives and will be no more than eloquent testimcnials in history to the impo- tence and helplessness of the United Nations. 118. We are aware that the Pretoria regime has consis- tently ignored and obstructed the efforts of the United Nations to bring genuine independence to Namibia, as spelled out in Security Council resolution 435 (1978). The failure of the multi-party pre-implementation meet- ing, held at Geneva from 7 to 14 January 1981, which had been convened to reach agreement on a date for a cease-fire and the start of the implementation of resolution 435 (1978), was the result of South Africa's odious deci- sion to perpetuate its illegal occupation of Namibia. 119. In view of South Africa's attitude during the Ge- neva talks, the Security Council considered the question of Namibia last April.4 It is unfortunate that the Security Council was unable to adopt concrete political and eco- nomic measures to compel South Africa to comply with the resolutions of the United Nations relating to Namibia. in particular resolution 435 (1978). In this connection, my delegation gave its unqualified support to the draft resolu- tions introduced in the Security Council during its debate on the question of Namibia. We did so in keeping with our firm commitment to a speedy solution to the question of Namibia within the framework of resolution 435 (1978) and the other pertinent resolutions of the United Nations. 120. We cannot and we must not renege on our solemn duty and responsibility to the people of Namibia. For Namibia is the direct and legal responsibility of the United Nations until genuine self-determination and na- tional independence are achieved in the Territory, in ac-. cordance with General Assembly resolution 2145 (XXI) of 27 October 1966 and 2248 (S-V) of 19 May 1967. 121. South Africa's callous disregard of the will of the international community concerning Namibia flouts th~ United Nations itself. In the process it has violated every basic principle upon which the United ·Nations was founded: the right of self-determination of peoples, re- spect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States, the non-use of force and the settlement of disputes by peaceful means. 122. Over the years it has shown total disrespect for the rule of law. In the face of South Africa's continuing de- fiance of the United Nations, there is no doubt in the mind of my delegation that it is time that comprehensive mandatory sanctions were imposed against that country. The adoption of such measures requires the support of all 124. Our position is anchored also on non-recognition of the spurious entities created by South Africa in Namibia and its attempts to institutionalize the bantusta- nization of Namibia and strong condemnation of South Africa for its brutal oppression of the Namibian people and for its repeated armed attacks against its neighbouring States, particularly Angola. Moreover, we believe that un- til Namibia attains independence, the efforts of the United Nations Council for Namibia to mobilize international public opinion concerning Namibia must continue. The Council's mandate as the sole legal Administering Author- ity for Namibia until independence should be reaffirmed. 125. My delegation also supports the Nationhood Pro- gramme for Namibia, in particular Decree No. 1 for the Protection of the Natural Resources of Namibia,2 which declares that these resources are the inviolable heritage of the Namibian people and that their exploitation by foreign economic interests under the protection of the repressive racist colonial administration is illegal and contributes to the maintenance of the illegal occupation regime. 126. South Africa has directly challenged the authority of the United Nations over Namibia. We have before us several recommendations of the United Nations Council for Namibia, which will be considered in the course of our debate. We must put an end to South Africa's actions, which constitute a serious ~hreat to international peace and security, by adopting effective and concerted meas- ures against it. There is no room for further delay. We have repeatedly condemned South Africa for its flagrant violations of the Charter and its defiance of the United Nations. 127. Indeed, as I said at the outset, the question now ' before us is no longer the question of Namibia. That question has been answered clearly, unequivocally and repeatedly. The question now before us is the question of the United Nations-whether the United Nations is help- less and impotent in the face of the intransigence of one nation; indeed, whether the United Nations itself will allow one nation to defy and ignore the collective will of the international community. The answer lies in what we do with the resolutions before us and in their implementa- tion. 129. During the current year I have on several occasions expounded the views of my delegation on the subject under discussion: at the 98th meeting of the thirty-fifth session; before the Security Council;s at the International Conference on Sanctions against South Africa; and at the 12th meeting of the eighth emergency special session. I therefore feel confident enough that the Brazilian position is well known to all Member States and requires no fur- ther reiteration. I shall be very brief and confine my remarks to the main tenets which should be upheld, in our view, in dealing with the issue. First, the South African occupation of Namibia is illegal and should be terminated forthwith, in accordance with General Assem- bly resolution 2145 (XXI) and the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 1971. Secondly, the Ter- ritory of Namibia must become an independent sovereign State, in accordance with countless resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. Thirdly, Namibia should accede to statehood and independence with its territorial integrity preserved, which means that Walvis Bay is an integral part of its territory. Fourthly, pending full independence, the United Nations Councii for Namibia has the legal authority to administer the Ter- ritoryon behalf of the United Nations, in accordance with General Assembly resolutions 2248 (S-V) and 2372 (XXII). Fifthly, SWAPO, as the only liberation movement seeking true independence for the Territory, is the sole and. authentic representative of the people of Namibia. 130. The points that I have just listed are the basis of the consensus already reached with a view to bringing about an internationally acceptable settlement of the ques- tion of Namibia. They should not be lost sight of in any new effort or initiative designed to make the aspirations of the international community with regard to Namibia come true. 131. I shall refrain from reciting once again the long and painful process designed to lead to the implementa- tion of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). Many expectations were shattered before we even approached its initial stages. Only this year, the failure of South Africa to negotiate responsibly at the pre-implementation meeting at Geneva, and the failure of the Security Council to adopt appropriate measures, have led us from the eighth emergency special session last September to the present meetings without any substantive progress to record. 132. We continue to believe that resolution 435 (1978) is the only internationally acceptable basis for promoting the genuine exercise by the people of Namibia of their right to self-determination. Its contents should neither be haggled over nor carped at. Allow me to quote fro.m the statement delivered at the opening of the general debate of this session by the Minister for External Relations of Bra- zil: "The question ot the independence of Namibia has been dealt with by the international community on the basis of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) and of the plan drawn up by the Organization which the Coun- cil has embraced by that resolution and which has been 133. We have followed attentively the endeavours re- ported by the contact group of the Western countries to ensure Namibia's independence in 1982. The achievement of Namibia's independence by peaceful means and in compliance with resolution 435 (1978) would bear testi- mony to the ability of this group, thus crowning the efforts of the United Nations to solve one of its most intractable problems. We would not, however, support any arrangements implying a partial implementation of resolu- tion 435 (1978) -and we would consider any attempt in this direction to be tantamount to stripping this resolution of its purpose, which is to guarantee full independence to Namibia and self-determination to its people. 134. The achievement of an internationally acceptable settlement of the Namibian problem is essential so that the countries of southern Africa lIlay rededicate their NarES I Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, I.C.I. Reports 1971, p. 16. 4 Ibid., 2267th to 2277th meetings. s Ibid., 2296th meeting.