A/36/PV.67 General Assembly

At the thirty-fifth session the General Assembly decided [98th meeting] to postpone its debate on the question of Namibia in anticipation of the pre-implementation meeting held at Geneva from 7 to 14 January 1981. All of us then shared the hope that we were approaching the end of the long negotiating process and were as close as we had ever been to the implementa- tion of the United Nations plan embodied in Security Council resolution 435 (1978). Then, our hopes were shattered again owing to the intransigence of South Af- rica. Pretoria obviously wanted to have pre-implementa- tiDn talks but no implementation. Once again South Af- rica had obstructed the United Nations plan with the aim of gaining time to improve its position in Namibia. 2. After a period of stalemate~ the negotiations on a peaceful and internationally recognized solution of the question of Namibia have now been activated and hopes are raised again that the United Nations plan will this time be implemented. Naturally, we share this hope-a hope which, on our part, is based less on any recent hopeful signs than on our belief in the urgent necessity of progress. In fact, we are still waiting, as we did through- out last year and the year before that, to see any real indications that Pretoria is committed to the process. The repeated acts of armed aggression against Angola and other independent neighbouring countries being commit- ted by South Africa up to this very day are not conducive to the creation of that climate of confidence in the peace process for which Pretoria itself has called. The same is true of South Africa's outrages against and intimidation of the Namibian people, especially supporters of the South West Africa People's Organization [SWAPO]. Neverthe- less, we welcome the fact that efforts are again being un- dertaken to pave the way for a peaceful transition to inde- NEW YORK pendence for Namibia, already long overdue. South Africa must be given no excuse to stall the negotiations further. 3. The Foreign Ministers of the Nordic countries have during the past year reaffir-med their conviction that the people of Namibia must be permitted as soon as possible to determine its own future through free and fair elections under the superyision and control of the United Na~ions, in accordance with resolution 435 (1978). They have ap- pealed to the Governments of the Western contact group to take measures which can secure the earliest possible implementation of the United Nations plan for Namibia. 4. Sweden has followed closely the ups and downs of the negotiating process during the years and we share the frustration of the party most concerned, the repressed people of Namibia. We have advocated increased and ef- fective pressure on South Africa, and urged the Security Council to contemplate appropriate means to this end to achieve the early implementation of the United Nations plan, prepared and adopted by the Council itself. It is by now a truth obvious to all members of the Assembly that there can be no real solution in Namibia without the true participation of SWAPo. This is not a question of par- tiality in favour of SWAPO; it is a statement of a fact which it seems is slowly being accepted also by the con- testing side. The United Nations itself must also always be partial in this conflict in the sense that it has been entrusted by international law with the particular responsi- bility of looking after the interest of the people of Namibia. And the interest of the people of Namibia today is freedom from repression and freedom to shape its own political future as an independent nation. My Government remains prepared to assist the United Nations in carrying out the peaceful transition to a free and independent . Namibia. 5. Pending progress in the fulfilment of our common re- sponsibility towards Namibia, Sweden, for its part, will continue to give humanitarian aid through SWAPO to the many Namibian refugees in the neighbouring countries, as well as to the various United Nations and non-govern- mental bodies assisting Namibia. We are particularly con~ cerned about the refugees in Angola who have suffered· from South African acts of armed aggression in that area. My Government has given higlr priority to relieving the plight of the refugees through considerable humanitarian assistance, and to providing bilateral assistance to the States suffering from South African aggression. We sin- cerely hope that other States will find it possible to in- crease their aid. It is our hope that the day is approaching when the assistance we give today to Namibians in exile will be transformed into long-term development co-opera- tion with the Government of the new State.

For a number of years, the question of Namibia has been constantly on the agenda of the General Assembly, at the epicentre of the activities of the Organization of African Unity [OAU] and 7. In spite of r.umerous decisions of the United Nations, the OAU and the conferences of non-aligned countries, the Pretoria racists continue their unlawful occupation of Namibia and are carrying out their cruel terrorization and repression of the Namibians, particularly of the members of SWAPO. They are carrying out further militarization of the Territory and rapidly transforming it into a bridgehead for aggression against neighbouring sovereign States. 8. The Pretoria regime is constantly building up its mili- tary potential and military presence in Namibia. 1.1':- armed forces of South Africa in Namibia include infantry, armoured tanks, mechanized paratroop units, police, punitive and other units which are deployed at approx- imately 40 bases located along the border with Angola and at 35 bases in the so-called police zone. According to SWAPO, South African troops in Namibia now number 100,000. Actively operating in Namibia and also carrying out subversive activities in Angola are thousands of mer- cenaries, ex-members of the armed forces of the former Southern Rhodesian oppressors and others from certain Western countries. The South African occupiers are pro- ceeding with the ·'Namibianization" of the war in Namibia by setting up tribal armies and drafting into mil- itary service Namibian youth in the 18 to 25 age group. According to the monstrous designs of the racists, Nami- bians ought to kill Namibians. 9. In the Republic of South Africa its~lf, the apartheid regime, with the direct assistance of States members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO]. is strengthening its military forces and the police apparatus at an intensive pace and developing its own military pro- duction. Military expenditure in South Africa during 1981-!982 will increase by a factor of three compared with 1974 and will reach 3 billion rand. According to various estimates, the Republic of South Africa can at present rely on 500,000 troops. In spite of the embargo on the supply of weapons to South Africa, imposed under Security Council resolution 418 (1977), as can be seen from United Nations documents. in particular the working paper prepared by the secretariat of the Special Commit- tee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colo- nial Countdes and PeoplesI concerning military activities in Namibia, the co-operation of m~merous Western coun- tries with the Republic of South Africa in the military sphere is continuing. With the assistance of the Western countries and their monopolies, a military industry has been established in South Africa and a nuclear potential is also being developed. According to United Nations data, in 1980 the Republic of South Africa itself had become one of the major weapons manufacturers in the southern hemisphere and in this respect is the tenth largest in the world. The produetion and acquisition of weapons are car- ried out under the aegis of the Armaments Development and Production Corporation [ARMSCOR].. owned by the 11. Legitimate concern is aroused by the continuing nu- clear co-operation of the Western Powers with South Af- rica, which has led to the genuine possibility of the ap- pearance of nuclear weapons in the hands of South African racists. As has been stated by the Chairman of the South African Council on Atomic Energy, Wynand de Villeiers: "Enriched uranium in South Africa can be used for the production of nuclear bombs". This was reported by The Washington Post on 30 April 1981. 12. The magazine Southern Africa, in its January-Febru- ary 1981 issue indicated that the expansion of the enrich- ment plant at Valindaba, which is to be completed in 1981, together with the building of reactors at Koeberg in 1982 and 1983, will greatly increase South Africa's ca- pability of 'producing nuclear weapons. It should be pointed out that all those possibilities are being developed with the direct assistance of specific Western countries. . 13. It might well be asked why, considering the compre- hensive assistance of Weste;:n countries and their monopo- lies, South Africa has set up such a military machine and is developing its nuclear potential. We do not have to look very far for an answer to that. question. The Pretoria regime is undertaking all these projects in an effort to thwart the lawful aspirations of the South African and Namibian peoples to freedom and independence, to de- stroy their national liberation movements and to destabil- ize the internal political situation in neighbouring sov- ereign countries-first and foremost in Angola-and thereby to extend the racist and coloniliJ domination in South Africa and in the unlawfully occupied Territory of Namibia. It is also intended to assure and protect the- in- terests of those in the imperialist circles of the West in the southern part of the Afirican continent. Those interests are by no means small. 14. Approximately 90 poreign fIrms take part in plun- dering the natural resources of Namibia and the cruel ex- ploitation of its indigenous population, and dozens. of Western monopolies are prospecting for new deposits. Pi~ amonds, gold, base metals and especially uranium, as well as the cheap labour force of indigenous inhabitants; are precisely what attract, like a magnet, South Afriean and Western transnationai corporations into Namibia. Ap,. proximately 80 per cent of the overall volume of the hold- irlgs of the industry in Namibia that provides approx.. hnately two thirds of total Namibian exports· and approximately half of the Government revenues can be at- tributed to three companies: Consolidated Diamond Mines of South West Africa Ltd., the Tsumeb Corporation and Rassing Uranium Ltd. 15. The Tsumeb Corporation, which is controlled by American Metal Climax and the Newmont Mining CorpO!- ration, both with headquarters in the United States, ac- 17. Ignoring the vital interests of the indigenous ~frican population, transnational corporations are mercilessly ex- ploiting it and deriving great profits therefrom. Suffice it to say that (he ratio of the incomes of the white and black populations, according to United Nations data, is through- out the country approximately 12 to 1, and in the north- ern regions of Namibia it is 25 to 1. 18. A particular danger lies in the practically unlimited accegs of South Africa to Namibian uranium, which makes it possible for the Pretoria regime to implement its nuclear programme; that in turn, taking into account the nuclear ambitions of the Republic of South Africa, con- tains within itself a genuine threat to peace and security not only in the southern part of the African continent but also beyond it. 19. It is particularly these concrete materia! profit mo- tives, as well as the milit&.-y, strategic and political inter- ests of the West, that explain the heightened activities in Namibia of those in the imperialist circles of the basic Western countries members of NATO and their position on the question of a Namibian settlement. 20. At the 3rd meeting of the eighth emergency special session, devoted to Namibia, the representative of SWAPO emphasized that ., . . .' in addition to the historical wrongs done to us by the successive colonial Powers, the economic and strategic interests of the maj\Jr capitalist Powers, the trading partners and the ones providing the military safety net of NATO for the Boer regime have aggra- vated the conditions of conflict, violence and political and military confrontation between the revolutionary forces of change and the defenders of the status quo." 21. Quite some time has elapsed since the adoption by the Security Council of resolution 435 (1978), containing the basis for a Namibian settlement. SWAPO expressed its total readiness to go along with the implementation of this resolution. However, the Republic of South Africa, under the guise of a readiness to seek a solution of the Natribian problem, and aided and abetted by the five Western countries, has never ceased its attempts to under- mine the United Nations plan on Namibia and to set up and strengthen its own puppet neo-colonialist regim~ ac- ceptable to Pretoria and to the West. Now the Republic of South Africa and its protectors are making new attempts to ensure conditions in the settlement that would be ad- vantageous to the South Africa regime. At its eighth emergency special session, the General Assembly, in its resolution ES-8/2, "Firmly rejects the latest manoeuvres by certain members of the Western contact group aimed at under- mining the international consensus embodied in Se- curity Cou~cil resolution 435 (1978) and depriving the 22. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR supports the recommendations of the United Nations Council for Namibia contained in its report [A/36/24, para. 708], in which in particular the collusion by the United States, the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, France and Israel with the South African racists is con- demned. It also calls upon the international community, and particularly all Member States, to refrain from any recognition of or co-operation with any regime that ~e illegal South African administration may impose upon the Namibian people in disregard of the relevant resolutions of the Security Council imd the General Assembly. 23. In this connection, there is perfectly understandable indignation and concern on the part of the international community about statements of important officials of the United States Administration concerning United States in- tentions of establishing friendly relations with the apartheid regime. Unfortunately, this is not limited to words but extends to concrete action. This is reflected in the triple veto in the Security Council by the Western Powers, including the United States, of draft resolutions in which it was proposed to exact comprehensive manda- tory sanctions against South Africa under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations; it is also reflected in the Security Council's inability, because of the United States veto, to fulfil its obligations concemifig the un- provoked, large-scale armed aggression launched by the Republic of South Africa against Angola. 24. Unquestionably, this policy of protection by the Western Powers, first and foremost the United States, with regard to the brazen racists cannot but encourage them to continue their illegal occupation of Namibia and promote aggression against neighbouring sovereign States, especially against the People's Republic of Angola. As the entire progressive international community has done, the Heads of State and Government of the front-line States and Nigeria, in the communique issued at their emergency., summit conference held at Lagos on 11 Sep- tember this year, "strongly condemned the support being given by the Reagan Administration to the South African white minority racist regime, thereby encouraging that re- gime to be more daring in the perpetration of its heinous criminal acts against Angola and other neighbouring inde- pendent States, as well as its obstinate defiance of the interllational community" [see A/36/525, annex]. 25. It is necessary resolutely to stop the aggressive ban- ditry of the Republic of South Africa in regard to Angola and a number of other African States. 26. In view of the stubbornness of the Republic of South Africa in refusing to carry out the appropriate deci- sions of the United Nations on Namibia and its ~ynical disregard of those decisions and the Pretoria regime's per- petuation in southern Africa, in particular Namibia, of a policy that is fraught with serious threats to international peace and security, the Security Council must adopt urgent measures against the racist South African regime, including comprehensive mandatory sanctions in accord- ance with Chapter VII of the Charter. It is also necessary to obtain from all States strict and total c~liMce with 27. Guided by its position of principle, the Byelorussian SSR has consistently spoken out and continues to speak out for ensuring that the people of Namibia exercises its inalienable right to self-determination and independence on the basis of the preservation of the unity and territorial integrity of that country, including Walvis Bay, the early, unconditional and total withdrawal of all armed forces and adminbtrative authorities of the Republic of South Africa from Namibia, and the transfer of all authority to the peo- ple of Namibia through SWAPO, recognized by the United Nations and by the OAU as the sole lawful repre- sentative of the Namibian people. 28. The people of Namibia, under the leadership of SWAPO, is gallantly struggling to become the true master of its own country. The barbarous domination of the colo- nizers and racists is logically coming to its inglorious end. The United Nations must undertake new and com- prehensive efforts to support this just struggle of the Namibian people. 29. The Byelorussian SSR once again states that it is in full solidarity with the brave Namibian people, under its tested leadership, SWAPO, and expresses confidence that the day is not far off when the people of. Namibia will achieve genuine freedom and independence for its father- land.

it has now been three. years since the Security Council adopted resolution 435 (1978) endorsing the United Na- tions plan for the independence of Namibia. Through the adoption of that plan, initially proposed by the five West- ern countries in the Security Council, the international community declared that this was the best diplomatic means of putting a halt to the illegal occupation of Namibia by the racist regime of Pretoria, permitting the Namibian people to exercise their right to determine their own future and ensuring thei independence. Political ob- servers believed that the adoption of that resolution was a step in the right direction. However, three years have' passed since then and the problem of Namibia remains as it wag. The occupation of Namibia continues and the Namibian people are still exposed to all kinds of-racist persecution, political oppression and the plundering of their resources without My hope of freedom unless South Africa respects United Nations resolutions, since the United Nations is historically re~ponsible for saving that Territory from the colonialist and racist yoke. 31. If this impasse in the efforts of the international community to implement the United Nations plan to put a halt to the occupation of Namibia means anything, it is that South Africa's strategy of perpetuating its occupation is based on simple tactics-a policy of duplicity which resolves nothing and is intended only to play for time. There is not enough time to go into all of South Africa's countless manoeuvres, which have resulted in a kind of impasse in the efforts to achieve our objective. The latest of these manoeuvres was the pre~implementationmeeting, held at Geneva from 7 to 14 January 1981. Pretoria's tac- tics may have appeared simple, but these tactics, which were designed to play for time, have very serious strate·· gic and political dimensions, because the-eontinuation of Namibia's occupation serves the political, economic and military interests not only of ~be racist regime of Pretoria but also of a certain number of Western Governments and ~gainst Angola. This is also reflected in all the interna- tional military support the racist regime of Pretoria is re- ceiving. 33. The Western countries permanent members of the Security Council, which are continuing to protect that re- gime, have opposed any resolution that could compel it to end its occupation of Namibia and to grant true indepen- dence to the Namibian people, under the leadership of SWAPO. Thanks to this political support based on the veto right, the international community has so far been unable to express its views or to impose comprehensive economic and military sanctions against Sout.h Africa. E~eryone knows that the Western countries have manoeu- vred to get around the embargo by setting up military industries in South Africa itself. Worse still, South Africa has found in Israel an ally providing it with the technol- ogy it needs to produce nuclear weapons in order to sur- round Africa as a whole with such weapons. 34. The Security Council has been unable not only to adopt· a resolution imposing economic sanctions on the Pretoria Government but also to condemn South Africa following its invasion of Angola. 35. The Government of Qatar, supporting the right of peoples to freedom, self-determination and independence, calls for the implementation of resolution 435 (1978) be- cause it considers that that resolution recognizes Namibia's right to independence and the illegality of the Pretoria regime's occupation of Namibia. Therefore, we call for the imposition of mandatory sanctions against that Gov~rnment to ensure that it acts in accordance with the will of the international community and with United Na- tions resolutions recognizing that people's right to inde- pendence and sovereignty, under the leadership of SWAPO.

The General Assembly is discussing the problem of Namibia once more in less than three months. My delegation notes with deep concern that the situation in Namibia is worsening because the Govern- ment of South Africa is continuing to place obstacles in the way of international efforts to bring about that Terri- tory's independence, with a view to continuing to occupy Namibia illegally and imposing an internal settlement on the Namibian people. The failure of United Nations efforts to achieve Namibia's independence and the fact that dozens of resolutions remain unimplemented result from the continued refusal of the racist Government to respond to the will of the international community, and of the international community's impotence in compelling that regime (0 respect legality. 37. The Security Council itself has been unable to im- pose comprehensive mandatory sanctions against the re·· gime, under Chapter VII of the Charter, because of the diplomatic protection provided by the Western Powers per- manent members of the Security Council. These ~ountries are continuing to provide the regime with military and economic assist~uce, since they are not willing to sacri- 39'. The events since the adoption of Security Council resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (1978), the failure of the Geneva meeting at the beginning of this year and the scandal of the triple veto in the Security Council a f~w months ago have revealed much to us. We are 10- creasingly 'convinced ~at ~he racist regime's .manoe':!vres are designed only to ga10 time and erode the 1Ote~~tiOnal solidarity with the strugg~e of the people of Na~llbla and to pursue its plot for an 10ternal .settlement, Y'~lch would enable it to continue to explOit the Namlblan people through a 5eries of sham structures. All the failures we have encountered since the meeting at Geneva and also the use of the triple veto lead us to belie~e that the~ is collusion against the ending of the occu~atlOn and ~ga1Ost Nanlibia's independence and total sovereignty over Its ter- ritory and its resources. 40. We must recall here that the Pretoria Government's refusal to implement Security Council resolution 435 (1978) constitutes a failure of the Western contact group, which has been unable to exercise sufficient pressure to compel the racist regire~ to respect international legality. This places in doubt the credibility of the group and the seriousness of its work. 41. We have no hesitation in placing the responsibility for the deterioration of the situation in southern Africa on the United States Administration. From the time it first openly took the racist Pretoria regime und.er its wing, right up to its latest veto of the draft resolutiOn that con- demned South Africa for its aggression against Angola, that Administration has given more than ample proof of its aggressive intentions against the African continent and all the peoples fighting to regain their usurped .rights. That is why the world has to deal today· not With the racist Pretoria regime alone. The essential, major problem at present pits the entire world against the United States, which wants to crush the struggle of the peoples of south- ern Africa for their independence, freedom and dignity. Unlike the United States Government, which is alone in openly supporting the racist regime, the other Western Governments that claim to support the international efforts to end the occupation of Namibia in fact limit themselves to paying lip service to the condemnation of the illegal occupation of Namibia and of the pol~cy of apartheid, while doing everything they can, m all spheres, to enable the South African Government t~ con- tinue to colonize Namibia and exploit and plunder !ts re- sources, in co-operation with those Governments' corpo- rations and economic interests. 42. The dimensions of that plot are now very clear; the attempt to mislead and "anaesthetize:' the. world h~s failed. It is no coincidence that the dimenSions of thiS plot against the Namibian people were revealed at the very moment when the Arab people were discovering the scope of the plot against Palestinian autonomy hatched at Camp David-a facsimile of th~ sham settlement th~t !he Pretoria Government seeks to Impose on the Namlblan people. 44. The military aggression by South Africa against An- gola resembles, ~n its character, its ~ims and. the me.ans used in carrying it out, the Israeh aggreSSiOn aga10st southern L..banon. We note, also, that the goals of the terrorism engaged in by South Africa aga~nst the peopl~s of southern Africa and those of the terronsm engaged m by Israel against the people of Palestine and the Arab ~ pIes are identical to and within the framework of U~!OO States strategy, whkh, using conc~Pts tha~ we. ~Jec~, draws up international plans to reimpose lmpenahsm s hold and to plunder our peoples of t~~ gains ther ~ave made since their liberation from traditional colomahsm. 45. My delegation believe~ that-in. a~l the ~irc~m­ stances surrounding the question of Namibia, and m Vl~W of the Pretoria Government's stubborn defiance of the w111 of the international community, proving that that Govern- ment is really not interested in a peaceful settlemen! of the question-the international community has .the obhga- tion to proclaim its will clearly and categoncally. The failure of the Security Council, prevented by the veto from assuming its responsibilities, prov~s that we have. ex- hausted all the available means. That IS why we beheve that it is very important to draw up and put into effect an over-all strategy to mobilize all our possibilities for liber- ating Namibia and putting an end to the threa~ to the se- curity of the front-line States. 46. We must count on ourselves, on our capabilities, on our friends and on SWAPO's struggle, which must be strengthened by every p?ssible means. T.hat is the o~ly way to solve the Namiblan problem,. which, along. wl~h the Palestinian problem and the questiOn of apartheId, IS still today a shameful blot on twentiedl century Western civilization. 47. We believe that the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions on South Africa, under Ch~Pter VII of the Charter, is the last peaceful method aval1abl~ f~r exerting pressure on the Pretoria Government to obhg~ It to comply with the will of the international commumty. We urgently call on all States, even if ,the Security <;oun- cil should fail to impose, separately and collectively, sanctions against South Af~ca, .to l?<>ycott th~t. cou.ntry completely, with a view to lsolat1Og It and obhg1Og It to end its illegal occupation of Namibia, to halt its acts of aggression against the neighbouring African countries and to end its criminal racist policy. 48. I wish to make it clear from this rostrum that the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic condemns all forms, in all spheres, of co-operation with o~ support !~r the Pretoria Government by other States, particularly mlh- tary and nuclear 90-operation between the .two racist re- gimes-that of Tel Aviv and that of Pretona. 49. We believe it is· very important that the Western countries and the interests contributing to the support af- forded to the racist regime and dealing with it should un- derstand that they cannot hope to continue their economic 50. The Syrian Arab Republic once again categorically proclaims its determination to support the struggle of the people of Namibia, under the leadership of its sole au- thentic representative, SWAPO, and the struggle of the peoples of southern Africa against settler colonialism in the region, to regain freedom, independence and equality of rights. We frrmly condemn the constant, repeated ag- gression against Angola and regard ourselves as a front- line country. As I have just stated, we believe that there is only one enemy-,be it Tel Aviv or Pretoria-and that the battle for the future is one and the same battle. 51. In conclusion, the Syrian Arab Republic, recogniz- ing the mandate of the United Nations Council for Namibia as the sole legitimate authority for Namibia until that Territory's accession to independence, renews its ex- pression of support for the Council and pays a tribute to it for its efforts to promote policies and programmcs in favour of self-determination and independence for the Namibian people. We pay a particular tribute to Mr. Lusaka of Zambia, who spares no effort in the service of this just cause, the cause of Namibia's freedom. 52. Mr.' SARRE (Senegal) (interpretation from French): The longstanding and justified dream of the international community, based on the speedy and comprehensive im- plementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978), was to dose this thirty-sixth session of the General As- sembly with the admission of N~ibia to the Organiza- tion. In so doing, we might have said, to paraphrase the great German thinker and poet, Goethe, "This day and this place mark a new era in international relations". 53. Unfortunately, South Africa's actions have tem- porarily interrupted that dream. We are therefore once again faced with realities which are, to put it mildly, re- grettable. . 54. The General Assembly's discussion of the question of Namibia, after the eighth emergency special session, held from 3 to 14 September, shows once again the inter- national :<>mmunity's concern about the explosive situa- tion prevailing in southern Africa. The illegal occupation of Namibian territory by the racist regime of South Af- rica, together with repeated attacks on Mozambique, An- gola, Botswana and Zambia, constitutes a serious threat to international peace and stability. 55. Fifteen years after the abrogation by the United Na- tions of South Africa's Mandate over Namibia [resolution 2145 (XXI)], 10 years after the proclamation by the Inter- national Court of Justice of the illegality of South Africa's occupation of Namibian territory,! five years after the adop- tion of Security Council resolution 385 (1976), calling for South Africa's immediate withdrawal from Namibia and the organization of free and fair elections under United Nations control and supervision, and three years after the adoption of Security Council resolution 435 ~ H978), South Africa is still continuing its illegal occupa- tion of Namibian territory and defying the United Nations in so doing. It is thereby extending and worsening the 57. The situation prevailing in southern Africa is such that, in addition to ~he implementation of Security Coun- cil resolution 435 (1978), it is necessary for the General Assembly to make use of Article 14 of the Charter, which says that the General Assembly may "recommend meas- ures for the peaceful adjustment of any situatkm, regard- less of origin, which it deems likely to impair . . . friendly relations among nations". 58. As the Head of State of Senegal, Mr. Abdou Diouf, said at the eighteenth session of the Assembly of Heads 9f State and Government of the Organization of African Unity, held at Nairobi in June, it is still possible to bring Namibia to independence through a negotiated solution based on the implementation of Security Council resolu- tion 435 (1978). 59. In this respect, the Western attempts to find a com- prehensive and just solution among the parties concerned deserve, in our view, to be encouraged. I need hardly remind representatives that Security Council resolution 435 (1978) was the result of lengthy negotiations with all the parties concerned, and in particular with the South African regime, which gave its assent at all stages of the negotiations. Therefore, South Africa should respect that commitment and the members of the Western contact .group that sponsored the resolution should bring the nec- essary pressure to bear on South Africa and perBuade it to act in accordance with the terms of that agreement. 60. It might be thought that the Security Council's inac- tion would serve only to strengthen South Africa's chal- lenge to the Organization; that because of that inaction it would feel assured of an understanding which would pre- vent any coercive measures against it. . 61. The process of the negotiations makes it clear that the South Afri~an regime has always increased its de- mands whenever a solution has seemed imminent. In- deed, there seems to be no limit to South Africa's demands and the conditions which it sets for the implementation of Security COIJncil resolution 435 (1978) and wh1ch the Western contact group is trying to limit. In these circum- stances, it would be at the least dangerous at present to support any understanding or surrender which would en- danger the credibility of the United Nations. 62. In supporting the Western initiative, Senegal had hoped that -the international community would lead South Africa to listen to the voice of reason. Indeed, it was convinced that the plan for a solution adopted by the Se- curity Council, the result of efforts sustained by a clear political will, would be speedily and comprehensively im- plemented. 63. The new demands of the racist regime of South Af- rica are part of its consummate skill in using all'possible means to delay Namibia's independence. They must be rejected by the Security Council. As the plan" was en- dorsed by the body charged with the maintenance of 65. Senegal, while encouraging the approach of the con- tact group, believes that if the new Western initiatives come to nothing the General Assembly should consider any measure to isolate South Africa in the international arena, particularly because Article 25 of the Charter obli- ges all States to accept the decisions of the Security Council, and we are confirmed in this view by the ad- visory opinion of the International Court of Justice dated 21 June 1971. . 66. The situation in southern Africa is a cause for con- cern to the Organization, since it could degenerate into a conflict which would threaten the security of all mankind. It is therefore the duty and responsibility of the interna- tional community to bring the necessary pressure to bear on South Africa, together with appropriate sanctions, so that Namibia may achieve independence. 67. In that conn~ction, Senegal renews its proposals on the Namibian question, made by its Minister for Foreign Affairs at the 7th meeting of the eighth emergency special session and at the 20th meeting of the present session, on 9 and 30 September 1981, respectively namely: first, to put an end to all military and nuclear collaboration with South Africa, in accordance with Security Council resolu- tion 418 (1977); secondly, to impose an effective em- bargo, particularly on oil; thirdly, to grant no more in- vestments- and loans; fourthly, to put an end to the purchasing and marketing of gold and other minerals from South Africa, as well as to co-operation with South Af- rican bodies which market the minerals; fifthly, to refuse South Africa certain essential supplies, inter alia elec- tronic and telecommunications material, machines and chemical products, as well as the transfer of technology. 68. My delegation would like to congratulate the Secre- tary-General of the United Natio-1s, and the United Na- tions Council for Namibia and its President, Mr. Paul Lusaka,. on the efforts they have constantly made to en- sure Namibia's accession to independence. Senegal gives SWAPO, the sole authentic liberation movement of the Namibian people, effective assistance of all kinds to make it possible for the Namibian people to realize their aspira- tion to genuine independence within a united Namibia. We must commend SWAPO for the spirit of initiative and openness, the determination to co-operate and the. politi- cal maturity shown by it over the Namibian question. 69. In conclusion I should ILke, on behalf of my coun- try, to appeal once again to the international community to do everything to ensure the scrupulous implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). In this respect, the Senegalese Minister for Foreign Affairs said here, on 9 September, at the 7th meeting of the eighth emergency special session, "The peace, security and stability of every State in the region are at stake and no one should count on any hoped-for lassitude on the part of Africa 71. A great deal has been said about the acute nature of this problem and the pressing necessity and importance of finding a quick solution to it. This is the third debate this year on this question. The eighth emergency special ses- sion which was held just over two months ago to consider the grave situation in Namibia and the further complica- tions which prevent the solution of this problem showed once again that world opinion and the overwhelming ma- jority of States Members of the United Nations demand that Namibia become an independent State without any further delay. 72. The just and final solution of the Namibian question is a matter of concern not only to the Namibian and Af- rican peoples, but also to all peoples who cherish free- dom, peace and justice throughout the world. 73. The African countries which won the independence of their States through the long and persistent struggle of their peoples desire, and rightly, that the last vestiges of colonial rule be eliminated from their continent and that Namibia be granted full national independence so that the Namibian people may attain the great and legitimate aspi- rations for which they have been fighting for so many years now. 74. The events that have taken place so far, especially those since this year's debates on the Namibia question, have furnished us with fresh evidence about the real aim of the enemies of the Namibian people-the perpetuation of the colonial occupation of Namibia. 75. The acts of furth-er colonization of Namibia, the per- sistent carrying out of the policy of apartheid against the Namibian people, the crimes, mass terror and extermina- tion aimed at extinguishing that people's revolts and armed struggle, are incontestable proof of the fact that the South African regime never intended before, nor does it now, to give up of its own will its colonial domination over Namibia. 76. That bloodthirsty regime is not only trampling under foot the sovereign rights of the Namibian people, but also showing total disregard for world public opinion by to- tally ignoring the resolutions and decisions adopted by this Organization, as well as the appeals and declarations issued by other international and African forums. 77. The Albanian delegation, as does many other dele- gations, continues to hold the view that the debate on the question of Namibia should be concentrated on the core of the problem, on discovering and denouncing' the real causes which have been and continue to be the main obstacles to its solution. - 78. The legitimate aspirations and just demands of the Namibian people for freedom and national independence are still facing many obstacles, plots and intrigues hatched by the Riscist regime of South Africa and the imperialist Powers that support it. It is precisely those Powers that, by many ways and means, have been trying to help the Pretoria regime maintain its colonial occupation of Namibia, in this way protecting their economk and politi- 79. Another thing that attracts attention is the fact that, at a time when the struggle of the Namibian people is being intensifIed and the indignation of world opinion and progressive forces is growing with every passing day, the corporations of imperialist countries and multinationals are increasing their -investments in South Africa, thus helping the racist regime to oppress the Namibian people. 80. A great fuss has been made for many years over the solution of the question of Namibia. Regardless of United Nations decisions condemning the illegal and barbaric oc- cupation of Namibia by South Africa troops, the militar- ization of Namibia and the attacks launched by South Af- rica against neighbouring countries from Namibian territory, the contact group continues to hold meeting after meeting to plot a political settlement under which the NaIJribian people would lay down their arms, while imperialists would safeguard their privileges in African countries rich in minerals and of great strategic impor- tance. 81. In order the better to assist the racists of Pretoria, the United States and other imperialists have always pre- tended to work towards finding so-called political and ne- gotiated settlements that would allegedly be to the advan- tage of and acceptable to everyone. But, now more than ever before, it has become crystal clear that this racist regime is not interested in an internationally acceptable settlement. It is interested only in a settlement acceptable to itself and compatible with its system of apartheid. 82. Under the cover of this concern for "peace" or for a "political settlement" of the question of Namibia, the Western Powers instigate and sanction the most criminal acts of the fascists of the Pretoria regime. All the man- oeuvring of the imperialist Powers has been aimed at deceiving the Namibian people, the other peoples of Africa and world public opinion. They intend to paralyse those peoples in their reaction against the presence of South Africa and the imperialist interests in Namibia. 83. By placing their own political, economic and strate- gic interests far above the expressed will of the interna- tional community, the imperialist Powers, the Upited States in particular, have encouraged South Africa to. pur- sue a perilous path, which threatens international peace and security. By openly challenging the embargo imposed on South Africa by the United Nations, the United States-interested in creating new military blocs in rivalry with the Soviet social-imperialists and helped by the Chi- nese social-imperialists-is fully and overtly engaged in supporting the regime of South Africa, including support in the military field. Since the pre-implementatiQn meet- ing on the Uaited Nations plan for NamJbia took place at 85. The United States and other imperialists are trying to justify their acts of aggression in Africa and the inten- sification of their political, economic and military support for the racists of South Africa by citing the need to coun- terbalance the influence of the Soviet Union in that conti- nent; whereon the ~~oviet social-imperialists try to present their influence as support for the African peoples against imperialism. It is this activity carried out by the super- Powers that encourages the racists of South Africa to rer- sist in their policy of apatheid, to keep Namib~a under their colonial rule, and to commit acts of provoca~ion and .armed aggression against the African countries, ..,s they did recently against Angola. 86. The Albanian delegation shares the view that there will be no genuine negotiated solution to the question of Namibia as a result of the schemes and manoeuvres of the enemies of the Namibian people. This problem will fInd its -final and just solution only when South Africa is forced to withdraw its troops from the Territory of Namibia and to give up its colonial policy in southern Africa, and only when an end is put to the interference and intrigues of the super-Powers in Namibia, granting the Namibian people the right to self-determination. That peo!Jle's struggle and its efforts for national affIrmation, freedom and independence have been long and persistent, and the struggles a.,d victories of other Afric~n peoples are vivid proof to that freedom-loving Namibian people that if it resolutely continues its armed struggle, this will lead it to genuine victory, ~ndependence and freedom. 87. The heroic people of Namibia, through their legiti- mate representative, SWAPO, have always made it clear that they have never given anyone else the right to decide upon their future and their rights. The leader of the Alba- nian people, Comrade Enver Hoxha, addressing the Eighth Congress of the Albanian Labour Party on I November this year, said that "The Namibian people, like all the peoples of Africa, have not reconciled and cannot reconcile themselves to racism and apartheid. Their exis- tence insults and angers all the African peoples." 88. The latest events have made it even clearer that their determined struggle is the only path that will lead the Namibian people towards the achievement of their rights and aspirations. No matter what may happen to delay in- dependence for Namibia and justice for the whole of southern Africa, ultimate victory is certain. 89. In conclusion, the Albanian delegation wishes once again to reiterate that the Albanian people and their Gov- ernment will firmly continue to condemn and denounce the colonial policy of the Pretoria regime towards Namibia. It wishes to reiterate that the Albanian people will continue to support the just liberation struggle being waged by the Namibian people for freedom and national independence. We are confident that nothing will force the Namibian people to give up their aspirations and their desire to live in freedom and independence. 91. Quite apart from the deep moral revulsion which is fdt by Nigeria fgr apartheid SOllth Africa, we consider it deplorable that racist South Africa has continued to occupy Namibia despite the jud.gement of 18 July 19663 by the International Court of Justice that racist South Africa's Mandate had become illegal. In response to that historic declaration by the International Court of Justice, the General Assembly has repeatedly and unequivocally pronounced itself by calling for the immediate and uncon- ditional withdrawal of the racist regime of South Africa from the international Territory of Namibia. It is an indis- putable fact that Namibia is now the direct responsibility of the United Nations and the international community. All the resolutions on this matter have been persistently ignored by racist South Africa, which has further entrenched its horrendous radst doctrine in Namibia. Rac- ist South Africa's defiance not only of the declaration of the International Court of Justict~ but of the resolutions of United Nations bodies is an affront to the whole of the illternational community. South Africa's act of defiance undermines the basis of international law. 92. Th~re is HO question about the opinion of the inter- national community on Namibia. It is decidedly opposed to racist South Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia. Namibia would be independent today if the innumerable resolutions of the Assembly and the force of public opin- ion were the sole determinants of its future. But Namibia continues to be held in bondage by racist South Africa with the active collaboration of its allies. The future of this international Territory has become enmeshed in the complexity' of international politics and in the greed of foreign economic interests, which have continued to plun- der the Territory with unabated vigour. South Africa has continued to receive aid and comfort from certain Powers which publicly proclaim their abhorrence for its vicious colonial policy in Namibia while at the same time secretly pursuing their dangerous policy of collaboration with the racist regime. Yet, ironically, it is those sr....-:;e Powers which, under the Charter of the United Nations, have been entrusted with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, a responsibility they have persistently failed to discharge in Namibia. Not only have they refused to endorse the application of mandatory sanctions on racist South Africa as prescribed by the Charter, they have also, only recently, vetoed resolutions condemning racist South Africa for its wanton and unprovoked attacks on neigh- bouring African States. 93. It is an illusion for any Power to believe that inter- national peace and security can be maintained in the face 94. In defence of their overt and covert collaboration with racist South Africa in its illegal occupation of Namibia, these Powers have not been short of explana- tions and pious declarations of hope that South Africa will be persuaded to withdraw from Namibia. First, we were urged to be patient; we were told that racist South Africa needed time for adjustment and that it shouid be allowed to extricate itself from Namibia in a decent man- ner. We were deeply suspicious of this specious argument but, nevertheless, we thought it prudent to urge SWAPO to show the greatest restraint. Eventually, after very diffi- cult and protracted negotiations promoted by the contact group, a peace plan endorsed by all the parties concerned was produced. This peace plan, accepted also by the United Nations in Security Council resolutivn 435 (1978), would, we were made to believe, lead Namibia in inde- pendence. What happened at the Geneva meeting is now a matter of history. 95. Recently, racist South Africa's allies have come out in open support of the racist regime on the ground that southern Africa is of strategic importance to them, and that it has to be defended against an imagined enemy lurking around somewhere. Is this really not a ludricrous position to take? Do racist South Africa's allies really believe that their strategic and other interests are better served by an open and unholy alliance with a regime whose vicious and repressive colonial policy in Namibia has been strongly condemned by all civilized people? Is it any wonder that after the meeting at Geneva the racist regime of South Africa has become even more truculent, intransigent and aggressive in its defiance of the will of the international community? 96. Africa's patience in this grave matter is not inex- haustible. From the beginning we have known and stated very clearly at every opportunity that there is no basis for the apparent belief in some quarters that racist South Af- rica can somehow be persuaded to withdraw from Namibia without the application of strong political and economic measures, including the imposition of manda- tory economic sanctions. This truth stands more clearly revealed now than ever before. Despite assertions to the contrary, racist South Africa is not now, nor will it ever be, prepared to co-operate with the United Nations in Namibia on any terms but its own. 97. Nigeria expects to see Namibia's independence by 1982, and believes that that independence must be based on resolution 435 (1978). Whatever consultations may be taking place towards achieving this must be honest, sin- cere and frank. 98. We in Nigeria value freedom not only for ourselves but also for oppressed people everywhere, not least in Af- rica. That is why our support for the just and legitimate struggle of the oppressed people of Namibia cannot be less than total. We do not seek confrontation with anyone, but we cannot ignore events in southern Africa as these events have incalculable consequences for the peace and stability of our continent. Namibia's heroic struggl~ for freedom and human dignity has attained epic proportions. No African nation can consider itself truly free as long as 99. In conclusion, I should like to pay a warm personal tribute to the President of the United Nations Council for Namibia, my good fiiend ..tnd brother, Mr. Paul Lusaka of zambia, for his tireless efforts on behalf not only of the United Nations, but of the suffering people of Namibia as well. His efforts and dedication to the cause of Namibia have won· him much respect and admiration interna- tionally. 100. Equally, I should like to avail myself of this oppor- tunity to express the appreciation of the Nigerian delega- tion to the President of this session for his deep personal and abiding interest in the struggle of the Namibian peo- ple for freedom and the efforts he has exerted to ensure justice for them.

I should like at the outset to express our thanks to the members of the United Nations Council for Namibia, under the competent leader- ship of Mr. Paul Lusaka, for the work they have accom- plished and for their exhaustive report [A/36/24], which is the sixteenth document of its kind. For 15 years now, the Council has been fulfilling the mandate entrusted to it by the General Assembly after it had terminated South Africa's MMdate over the former colony of South West Africa. It h~ bt:en 15 years of heroic struggle by the peolJle of Namibia against the huge military machinery of racist South Africa, a struggle for the overthrow of the last ~!\stion of colonialism on the African continent. The Council could have long since solved the question of granting independence to Namibia in keeping with the decisions of the United Nations, and of the OAU and the non-aligned movement if the racist clique of South Africa had not put up desperate resistance, and if it had not enjoyed all-round support by world imperialism anJ reac- tionary forces. The situation in southern Africa came to a head, particularly in recent years, following the- heroic victory of the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and Zim- babwe. Over 100,000 South African soldiers and police are waging an open colonial war against the indigenous population, as well as an undeclared war against neigh- bouring sovereign African States. Undeniable proof of this is offered by the recent large-scale aggression by South Africa against Angola with the aim of destabilizing the Angolan revolution and thwarting its peaceful devel- opment. It is no secret that within the framework of the global strategy of imperialism and tbe protection of the so-called vital interests of the United States in southern Africa, the pursued objective is the creation of a Lebanon-ty~ situation in Angola. !n this concept, ,the role of the Lebanese extremists is to be played by the UNITA4 forces, and that of Israel by South Africa. 102. The Czechoslovak people resolutely condemn the racist Pretoria regime which, in co-operation with the United States, is stepping up its interference in the inter- nal affairs of, and escalating its armed attacks on, the front-line States, in particular the People's Republic of Angola. The Czechoslovak people's unequivocal -support for and solidarity with the people of Angola-that proud 103. This year in particular the minority racist regime of Pretoria has been fiercely ~jecting all United Nati~ns decisions and all the basic principles for the settlement of the Namibia problem worked out in many years of delib- erations in various United Nations bodies, including the Security Council. It is doing everything in its power to prolo.~g its illegal occupation of Namibia, to prevent the victory of the national liberation movement of the Nami- bian people, headed by its vanguard, SWAPO, its sole legitimate and authentic representative. 104. Today more than ever before it is quite apparent diat this situation is not caused by South Africa's omnipo- tence but by the poHcies of the principal members of NATO, in particular the United States. Sometimes they criticize South Africa in words; but, in reality, as is re- vealed in many United Nations documents, they support and closely co-operate with South Africa. Particularly characteristic of the current situation is the rapprochement between the South African regime and the present United States administration within the fr&mework of its global strategy directed against nationa~ liberation movements. They apparently calculate that, with the help of South Af- nca, they might succeed in implementing their neo-colo- nialist designs on the African continent. The collusion be- tween Pretoria and Washington is, furthe~ore, the consequence of the latter's military-politic~l course and plans for achieving military superiority by initiating the production of a new generation of military technology. An important issue here is that of the valuable raw materials, mined largely in Namibia, which the United States im- ports from South Africa. Also, United States investments in Namibia are not negligitle; they are in excess of $2 billion. In addition to that, there are 350 United States corporations operating in the Territory of Namibia. 105. South Africa }fas been and continues to be a valu- able ally of the imperialist countries, not only in political and strategic spheres but also in military and economic spheres. It is well known that the Territory of Namibia supplies transnational corporations with such valuable raw materials as lead, copper, zinc, tungsten and uranium ore. 106. A dominant position among the transnational cor- porations is held by those located in South Africa, Great Britain, the United States, the Federal Republic of Ger- many, France and Canada. The example of Namibia illus- trates even more clearly the symbiosis of interests of the transnational monopoly circles and the Pretoria racist re- gime. That is precisely one of the main reasons for South Africa's continued domination of Namibia. 107. In view of those generally known facts and follow- ing the failure of the meeting at Geneva, as well as the triple veto in the Security Council against the imposition of sanctions against South Africa, can anyone still trust South Africa's Western allies to exert influence or pres- sure on it? To the contrary, it is quite obvious that it is the support of the Western countries which even now en- ables South Africa to pursue the course of postponing a 109. At the same time, we are in favour of the imple- mentation of General Assembly resolution ES-8/2, which condemns the u~lawful occupation of Namibia and calls fm the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions against the racist regime of South Africa, pursuant to Chapter VII of the Charter. 110. In conclusion, my delegation would like to express once again its full support for the just struggle of the people of Namibia, headed by its only recogilized repre- sentative, SWAPO, for an independent, free and demo- cratic Namibia.

I have the honour to- day of speaking on behalf of the five member Govern- ments of the c()nia\:;~ group-Canada, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States of America-which have been working to- gether during the past four years in an attempt to negoti- ate an internationally recognized settlement of the Nami- bian problem. 112. The independence of Namibia is one of the objec- tives that. every Government represented in this Assembly supports. Not one of our number would attempt to defend the legitimacy of South Africa's occupation of Namibia, and all of us subscribe to the proposition that Namibia should, at the earliest possible moment, join the ranks of the independent nations of the world. There are, however, differences of opinion as to how this goal should be reached. The five member Governments of the contact group are convinced that only a negotiated settlement ac- cepted by the people of Namibia, the Government of South Africa, the Governments of the front-line States and, ultimately, the United Nations can bring the indepen- dence of Namibia that we all so ardently desire. As an alternative to a negotiated settlement, the five countries of the group see only an indefinite continuation of a war with all of the suffering this would entail. 113. As I am sure representatives here assembled know, the foreign ministers of the five Western countries- met in New York on 24 September this year and decided to re- launch their negotiations on Namibia which had been in suspense since the break-up of the Geneva meeting last January. Our ministers made this decision on the basis of extensive discussions that had been under way for six months between the five, the front-line States, SWAPO and the GAU mission, led by Foreign Minister Ouko of Kenya. The present proposal of the contact group calls for the completion of three phases of negotiations' which we hope will lead to the beginning of the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) in 1982. 115. I would stress that, in presenting these constitu- tional principles, the contact group has not attempted to write a constitution for Namibia. That is the task of the Namibian constituent assembly, which, under the terms of Security Council resolution 435 (1978), will be elected for that purpose. The document that the group presented in Africa suggests guidelines for .the constituent assembly and sets forth certain broad principles to be reflected in the constitution. i16. In the second phase, the specific arrangements for UNTAG would have to be agreed upon. We intend also to make suggestions to help ensure that the transition would be conducted in a fair and impartial manner. 117. The third phase of the process would begin with a public commitment by all parties concerned to a date for the beginning of the implementation of Security Council resolution 435. (1978). 118. We are not yet in a position to report on the reac- tions of all the parties to the fIrst-phase proposals of the contact group. We can say, however, that the initial re- sponse has been encouraging. The five Western countries are well aware that there are still difficult issues left to resolve in the second phase. But we are convinced that with good will on all sides, with patience, forbearance and a spirit of constructive commitment there is every reason tq hope that negotiations can be carried through to a successful conclusion. 119. Another approach, and one which we believe offers no contribution in moving Namibia closer to inde- pendence, is embodied in the six draft resolutions of the United Nations Council for Namibia [see A/36/24, para. 708]. They are vitupera.tive in tone, unjust and inaccurate in their accusations, wholly unrealistic in their demands and unhelpful in the search for a negotiated settlement. fur from supporting, or even recognizing, the efforts of the contact group to establish conditions that will make possible the implementation of resolution 435 (1978) in 1982, draft resolution A only takes note of the present negotiations and, in operative paragraph 31, it rejects what it calls "the latest manoeuvres by certain members of the ... contact group" to undermine Security Counr.il resolution 435 (1978). We can only view this misinterpretation -of our efforts as ill-informed. ~ 7'1- This draft resolution would have the General As- ~" .1bly condemn two of the contact group States for col- lusion with South Africa in the nuclear field. This charge is made in apparent ignorance of the true state of affairs 121. In calling for increased financial support for SWAPO, the Council's draft resolution can only raise fur- ther accusations as to the ability of the United Nations to administer the transition in an impartial manner. 122. The draft resolution calls for the breaking off of all contacts with South Africa, the consequence of which would be the end of negotiations for the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). Having thus rejected the path of peaceful negotiations, the draft resolu- tion would have the General Assembly support "the armed struggle of the Namibian people", which we con- sider to be the least likely avenue to Namibian indepen- dence. 123. It is the contact group's judgement that this draft resolution, if adopted, would not contribute to the nego- tiations now under way and migiht be a hindrance to the achievement of the objective of those negotiations-the independence of Namibia. i .. In order that we do not ourselves compromise our role as negotiators, we shall, as in the past, absu';n when . this draft resolution comes to a vote. We should ,.npha- size that this c.:. stention is purely procedural and does not imply any position on the merits of the draft resolution. 125. In order to help maintain the atmosphere of mutual respect necessary to the conduct of the negotiations of the contact group, the five Western countries appeal to all parties to refrain from all actions which could make the implemenL~I~;)1.il of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) more diffici.Il~ to achieve.

The General As- sembly once again has on its agenda the question of Namibia, one of the issues of crucial importance for the formation nf an independent Africa and for peace and se- curity on that continent and in the world at large. 127. The Polish delegation is again speaking in order to express its grave concern over the present situation in Namibia, which is seriously aggravated by the racist and colonialist policy of the South African regime towards the Namibian people, a policy not ~ allow that people to gain its long-overdue independence. What is more, that regime is still perpetrating acts of brutal aggression against its neighbours. The latest evidence of this is the massive anned aggression against Angola. Such a policy places further obstacles in the way of independence for Namibia, an aim that the Assembly put fOiWard 15 years ago when it decided to terminate South Africa's Mandate over Namibia and to place the Territory under the direct responsibility of the United Nations until it achieves inde- pendence. 128. It is our political obligation and" moral duty to see 137. Bangladesh's position is founded on its constitu- to it that that decision is implemented without further tional commitment "to support oppressed peoples delay. I have in mind also other relevant resolutions of the throughout the world waging a just struggle against impe- General Assembly and the Security Cooncil, particularly rialism, colonialism and racism". It is backed by our un- resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (1978). We also ful~y sup- swerving adherence to General Assembly resolution 1514 port the appeal addressed to the Security Council in Gen- (XV), containing the historic Declaration on the Granting eral Assembly resolution ES-8/2. ~o~ ~:~e:n:e::.t: C~lO~:1 Counmes an~ ~:~les. t~e 129. This year, new acts of violence, oppression and ag- gression against the Namibian people and its neighbours have been perpetrated by the South African regime. At the same time, efforts to bring nearer the independence of Namibia have been more numerous than ever, both within and outside the framework of the United Nations. It is not my intention to recall all the facts, which are only too well known. 130. As far as Poland is concerned, it has always sym- pathized with the Namibian people in its struggle for in- dependence, viewing it as an essential part of the decolo- nization process in Africa. We have repeatedly condemned the policy of the South African regime to- wards Namibia, requesting the removal of its presence from that Territory and the recognition of the indepen- dence of Namibia in accordance with numerous United Nations re:-olutions. i 31. The Polish Government also reso{utely condemned the latest open aggression against Angola as an attempt to destabilize the situation in that independent African coun- try, further aggravate the situation in the region and en- danger world peace. 132. Since the beginning of the struggle of the Nami- bian people for its independence Poland has considered SWAPO as the sole and authentic representative of the Namibian people. Indeed, that Organization has become its acknowledged leader, capable of assuming responsibil- ity for solving any problem related to the attainment of independence and to the leadership of the country. The international authority of SWAPO has been consolidated; it has been recognized by both the United Nations and the OAU as the sole legitimate and authentic represen- tative of the Namibian people. 133. Last August, a SWAPO delegation headed by its President, Sam Nujoma, visited Poland. The Polish Gov- ernment availed itself of that opportunity to renew its as- surances of the firm and positive attitude of the Polish People's Republic with respect to the definitive liberation of Namibia, its genuine independence and the preserva- tion of the unity and territorial integrity of the country. 134. On the basis of its consistent position of principle, Poland stands ready to make its contribution to the cause of an independent Namibia also through its participation in the work of the United Nations Council for Namibia. 135. Let me conclude by expressing the hope and the wish that the day on which we welcome independent Namibia among us is near.

Bangladesh has repeatedly stated its position of principle on the question of Namibia, most recently in the Security CounciF and at the 6th meeting of the eighth emergency special session. 138. To that end, Bangladesh does not have any connec- tion with the South African regime. There are no eco- nomic and commercial dealings with South Africa and there is a total boycott against South Africa in the fields of sports and tourism. 139. In addressing itself to this question my delegation would like at the outset to underscore one fundamental premise-that independence in Namibia can and must be achieved without making any concessions to the princi- ples embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations, particularly Security Council resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (l978). We must take into account the objective real- ities of the situation in understanding and pursuing the constitutional and other arrangements that will accompany independence. 140. First and foremost, South Africa continues to occupy Namibia illegally in defiance of United Nations resolutions and the decision of the International Court of Justice. South Africa has steadfastly refused to recognize the United Nations Council for Namibia, which was established by a General Assembly resolution [resolution 2248 (S-V)], and has prevented it from even entering the Territory. Secondly, the past history of this Territory is replete with instances of all the ills that characterize colo- nialism, with the added brutality of the repressive regime of aparrh.eid and its institutionalized discrimination based on race, colour and property. Thirdly, the logical exten- sion of this policy has seen the systematic fragmentation of the Territory along ethnic and racial lines exemplified by the system of bantustanization. Fourthly, this system has been maintained and extended through repressive leg- islative actions, the extent of which has been annually recorded by the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peo- ples and the United Nations Council for Namibia. Fifthly, thousands of armed South Africarl troops recruited by national conscription continue to police the Territory aIld bolster repression there. These troops are not only engaged in suppressing the struggle for liberation but have extended aggression into neighbouring territories, with all the inherent dangers to international peace and security inherent in such action. Sixthly, thousands of Namibians engaged in the legitimate struggle for self- determination and independence lie incarcerated in jails within South Africa and Namibia, condemned as terror- ists. Seventhly, South Africa's vulnerability in the face ot virtually unanimous international condemnation and the scope of the war of liberation has pushed it to ill-con- cealed efforts to develop its nUclear-weapon potential, with all the dire consequences inherent therein. Finally, Namibia continues to be denied its economic wealth through ~ndiscriminate exploitation" of its natural resources, in violation of Decree No. 1 for the Protection of the Natural Resources of Namibia, enacted by the 142. In its advisory opinion of 21 June 1971,2 the Inter- national Court of Justice declared that the continued pres- ence of South Africa in Namibia was illegal and that therefore South Africa was under an obligation to with- draw from Namibia immediately. The decision of the General Assembly and the advisory opinion of the Inter- national Court of Justice clearly outlined the juridical sta- tus of the Territory. Unfortunately, South Africa, in de- fiance of the resolutions of the United Nations and the decisions of the International Court of Justice, refused to recognize the inalienable national rights of the people of Namibia. 143. Security Council resolutions 385 (l976) and 435 (1978) remain the only basis for the peaceful transition of the Territory from colonial subjugation to independence. We seek no more than the complete and unconditional implementation of these two resolutions as early as possi- ble. In the course of the last three years of deliberations, South Africa has deliberately placed one obstacle after another in the way of the implementation of the resolu- tions. It has raised innumerable objections to every report of the Secretary-General and, as one demand has been met, it has promptly raised a new demand, each time in- jecting an irrelevant or extraneous element. In this con- nection, the members of the Western contact group have a special responsibility to ensure the speedy implementation of the United Nations plan. 144. We commend the leadership of SWAPO, the true and authentic representative of the peop~e of Namibia, for its readiness to sign a cease-fire agreement and to agree on a target date for the arrival of UNTAG and the begin- ning of an electoral process supervised by the United Na- tions. We congratulate the front-line States for their pa- tience, understanding and flexibility ·in dealing with the very difficult situation created by South Africa. The lead- ers of Nigeria, Zambia, Mozambique, the United Re- public of Tanzania, Botswana, Angola and Zimbabwe de- serve to be commended for the statesmanship they have shown. We should also like to put on record our sincere appreciation of the efforts of the Secretary-General and his able colleagues for their efforts to implement the reso- lutions of the Security Council and the General Assem- bly. 145. Bangladesh deplores all attempts by the South Af- rican authorities to impose the so-called internal solution on the people of Namibia. The international community must, as a matter of urgency, adopt effective and compre- hensive measures under the Charter to ensure the com- plete isolation of South Africa and to compel it to with- draw from Namibia in accordance with United Nations resolutions. "Bangladesh believes that a just solution of the prob- lem can be achieved only through unconditional imple- mentation of the relevant Security Council resolution. "We also believe that the right of self-determination of the Namibian people can be exercised only through elections under the supervision and control of the United Nations and with the active and full participa- tion of SWAPO, the sole and authentic representative of the people of Namibia."9 147. In the face of continued intransigence on the part of South Africa, it is imperative that serious consideration be given to adopting other means to make South Africa abide by the United Nations plan of action for ushering in national independence and sovereignty for the people of Namibia.

The ques- tion of Namibia is an item that has been considered in many international forums during the course of this year, and my delegation has had ample opportunity to express its position on this very important issue on many occa- sions, most recently during the 6th meeting of the eighth emergency special session in our Foreign Minister's state- ment. 155. My delegation holds the firm view that the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia endorsed in Security Council resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (1978), which reflects the international consensus on this issue, provides the solid basis for a peaceful solution to the problem that would enable the freedom of that Territory and its suffering people finally to be realized. The imple- mentation of the plan has been awaited for far too long. 149. It is therefore my intention not to repeat today my Government's well-known position, but rather to draw to 156. The General Assembly, at its eighth emergency the attention of this Assembly some very crucial issues sPecial session, demanded once again the immediate im- directly linked to the item before ~~ as well as to other plementation of the plan without any prevarication, quali- similar problems which give rise to considerable concern fication or modification, and not later than December not only for my delegation but undoubtedly for the vast 1981. It is perhaps necessary to remind ourselves here of majority of the Members of this Organization. Article 25 of the Charter, confirmed by the International Court of Justice in its advisory opinion of 21 June 1971,2 150. My delegation fully shares the view which the according to which all decisions of the Security Council President very rightly expressed in his address on his are binding on all Member States, which have an obliga- election [lst meeting], that this session should be devoted tion to carry out the decisions of the Security Council on to work, implementation and follow-up, rather than to re- Namibia, as indeed on any other problem of which it is petitious and lengthy statements and resolutions. Yet the seized. It is, therefore: the duty of the United Nations, Assembly has no alternative but to debate once again the and especially of the Security Cuuncil, to take the neces- question of Namibia and add yet another series of resolu- sary steps and measures provided for in Chapter VII of tions to the hundreds already adopted by this and other the Charter that would compel the racist regime of South bodies of the United Nations, which repeatedly express Africa to put an end to the illegal occupation of the Terri- the ever-growing solidarity of the international community tory of Namibia. with the people of Namibia in their legitimate struggle for freedom and national independence under the leadership 157. The failure of the Security Council earlier this year of SWAPO, their sole and authentic representative. to impose comprehensive mandatory sanctions against that country created considerable frustration and disappoint- 151. The item before us is a clear case of colonialism, ment among the international community. From that in- racism, foreign occupation and oppression, which are al- ability stemmed the call upon all Member States by the jowed to persist in flagrant violation of the fundamental General Assembly at its eighth emergency special session rights of the Namibian people and in defiance of the au- for a voluntary boycott in order totally to isolate the thority of the United Nations itself. Today, more than ev~r South Africon regime politically, economically, militarily before, this Organization faces serious responsibilities, for and culturally. The final importance of resolution ES-8/2 Namibia is the only Territory in the world which has so adopted at that session will certainly be weighed' by our far been placed under its direct administering authority. determination to implement its provisions, acting indi- Yet the resultant stalemate in the situation in Namibia ob- vidually or collectively. viously raises the question of the credibility of the United Nations, because of its inability to give effect to the reso- 158. Cyprus, for its part, itself struggling under condi- lutions of its principal orgaJlS and the compelling need to tions of foreign occupation and gross injustice to safe- take the measures, as expressly provided' for in the .Char- guard its own independence, sovereignty, territorilll integ- ter, to give substance and validity to the Organization rity, unity and non-alignment, being a member of the 153. The non-implementation of the resolutions of the United Nations is the essence of the Namibian situation and other similar cases. It is the root cause of the per- petuation of all unsolved and proliferating international problems. The forces of aggression and injustice are al- lowed to prevail over the principles of freedom and jus- tice, thus adding to the escalation of already explosive situations not only in the southern African region but in other parts of the world, with unforeseen consequences and to the detriment of international peace and security. 154. It is, therefore, not resolutions alone, however masterly the drafting, that can bring the solution of prob- lems closer and lead to th~ achievement of desired goals. It is their effective implementation that is of paramount importance.

The Venezuelan delegation par- ticipates in this further consideration of the question of Namibia with a feeling of disappointment that its hopes of seeing a free and independent Namibia have still not been realized, three years after Venezuela became a member of the United Nations Council for Namibia and after voting in the Security Council in favour of resolution 435 (1978), which established appropriate procedures for en- suring Namibia's independence under close United Na- tions supervision. 160. This year, in a number of forums in various parts of the world, with the participation of States Members of the United Nations, the situation in Namibia has been considered exhaustively. The decisions taken in those fo- rums were received by the racist regime in Pretoria with the deafness and unchanging attitude to which we have become accustomed. 161. At Paris, at Panama, at Nairobi and in New York, the overwhelming majority of the Member States of the United Nations has continued to call for decisive meas- ures, in accordance with the Charter, to enable the Nami- bian people to exercise its inalienable right to self-deter- mination, freedom and national independence. There is no doubt that settlement of the Namibian problem is one of the priority goals of the United Nations, whose pos- sibilities for action are blocked by selfish, economic, stra- tegic, political and other interests. 162. We continue to feel a sense of frustration at the obstacles thwarting the efforts of the United Nations to settle the case of Namibia justly, thanks to the plans of the racist minority to perpetuate its illegal occupation and to drag out its exploitation of Namibian human and natu- ral resources indefinitely and with impunity. 163. As in other important areas of activity of the United Nations, the clear political will of all States is es- sential in order to resolve the question of Namibia, one of the last remaining cases of colonialism and one of the most shameful examples of the exploitation of man by man. 164. In this connection, Venezuela continues fully to support the plan adopted by the Security Council in its resolution 435 (1978). Any attempt to change it tenden- tiously behind the back of the Namibian people and the United Nations would be unacceptable to my country. The delegation of Venezuela would like to reiterate its re- pudiation of the tactics used by South Africa in order to transfer power to illegal groups which do not represent the interests of Namibia, and of any manoeuvre aimed at causing division among countries committed to 'the just cause of the Namibian people by the introduction of ele- ments of confrontation unrelated to the issue. 165. My delegation reaffirms its support for considera- tion by the Security Council of broader and more effec- tive sanctions against South Africa under Chapter VII of the Charter, as explicitly called for by the great majority of our countries at the International Conference on Sanc- tions against South A:rica, held at Paris from 20 to 27 May 1981, which call was reiterated by the General Assembly in its resolution ES-8/2. 167. One of the many aspects of South Africa's ac- tivities in Namibia is their close link with the mainte- nance of peace and security in southern A1f~ka. Namibian territory is frequently used by the racist regime as a springboard for unprovoked attacks against neighbouring countries, on the basis of its military superiority over weaker States. This leads us inexorably to the conclusion that joint, determined action by the international commu- nity is the way to restore the rights of the Namibian peo- ple and eliminate a persistent focal point of internati~nal tension. 168. The Venezuelan delegation still believes that all Members of this great Organization will respond positively to the appeal of the Namibian people, as reason and justice demand. We must preserve the credibility of and renew our faith in the role of the United Nations. 169. In the mean time, Venezuela will continue its ac- tivities within the United Nations Council for Namibia in defence of the rights and interests of the Namibian peo- ple.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the 10 member States of the European Community. 171. The 10 member States have made clear on a num- ber of occasions in recent months their views on the Namibia question and their disappointment at the failure to make progress towards the goal of independence in accordance with Security Council resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (1978). They reaffirm their views as expressed in Lord Carrington's statement in the general debate on 22 September [8th meeting) and in my statement at the 4th meeting of the eighth emergency special session on 8 September. Accordingly, I need not set forth these views again in this statement. 172. In the view of the European Community, the United Nations plan, endorsed in resolution 435 (1978), provides the only possibility of a peaceful transition to internationally recognized independence for Namibia in accordance with a precise and rapid timetable. The 10 member States reaffirm their unwavering commitment to the right of the people of Namibia to self-determination and independence by means of free and fair elections un- der the supervision and control of the United Nations, as provided for in resolution 435 (1978). In the Commu- nity's view, violence can only delay and impede the achievement of that objective. 173. The European Community therefore welcomed the statement by the Foreign Ministers of the five Western countries on 24 September here in New York. In particu- lar, we welcome and support their renewed determination to pursue the objective which they have set themselves of implementation of resolution 435 (1978) beginning in 1982. 174. The European Community as a body is not directly involved in the current round of negotiations and is there- fore not a party to the discussion of the constitutional principles which the five Western countries have put for- 175. The European Community appeals to all parties to refrain from all actions which could make the implemen- tation of resolution 435 (1978) more difficult to achieve. It urges all concerned to participate constructively in the negotiating process initiated by the five Western countries and to approach the remaining obstacles to the implemen- tation of resolution 435 (1978) in 1982 in a new spirit of co-operation. 176. Mr. 00 Gin Sun (Malaysia): It is a matter of se- rious concern to my delegation that after decades of delib- eration by the United Nations the question of Namibia remains unsolved. My delegation has repeatedly expressed in previous sessions of this body the serious implications of the crisis in Namibia for the peace and security of southern Africa and the entire world. 177. Today, 15 years after its Mandate over Namibia was transferred to the United Nations, South Africa is still in control of that country. The white minority regime has continuously employed deceptive and delaying tactics to deny the people of Namibia their basic right to self- determination and independence through free and fair elections under the supervision and control of the United Nations. In the mean time, in defiance of international demands, the regime flagrantly exploits the rich resources of Namibia, depriving the Namibian people of their inher- ent right to the wealth of their land. 178. Events in the last few years have shown that South Africa has systematically resorted t~ all possible means to sabotage the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia. It has manoeuvred to create an administrative structure to protect its own economic interests, with the apparent intention of unilaterally declaring the Territory independent. Its devious motives are clearly demonstrated by its establishment of the so-called "National Assem- bly" with broad legislative powers and the so-called "Council of Ministers" which has equally extensive exec- utive authority. 179. The regime has also intensified its military build- up hI the Territory and escalated its wanton acts of aggression and intervention against neighbouring African States, as well as other political opponents. The objective is c1ea.r: that is, to intimidate neighbouring States into not assisting the just struggle of the Namibian people and pur- posely io create chaos and instability in order to divert world attention from South Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia. The sustained efforts by the white minority regime to develop nuclear-weapon capability clearly dem- onstrates its belligerent attitude, an attitude that poses a grave threat to regional and international peace and • r secunty. .

This year again the painful question of Namibia figures on the agenda of the General Assembly. The Government 180. Having followed the question of Namibia very of the Republic of Mali would have liked to see this ses- closely, my delegation is convinced that the United Na- sion devoted to the triumphant and long-awaited welcome tions plan for the independence of Namibia, endorsed of Namibia to our midst in the United Nations. Indeed, in Secunty Council resolution 435 (1978), remains the Namibia is the only Territo!Y under mandate to which the only basis for a peaceful settlement of the question. The relevant provisions of the Charter concerning the freedom continuing validity of the plan has been reaffirmed by the of peoples, especially the provisions of Chapter XI, are international community in every forum in which the still not applied. The General Assembly has long been question of Namibia has been discussed, most recently at aware of this serious contravention of the Charter, for as ~t~C;:~:~7::=:_:~:C:~,~::::~_c~~;~~o_:e,ec' :~:_.:::: ago ~t :_~:~:~fu::st~~:=d.te.~ .:l 181. The question that often comes to mind is why it is that, in spite of the universal condemnation of South Af- rica's action, that country has been able to pursue its ille- gal policies. The answer clearly lies in the support and collaboration that South Africa continues to receive from certain countries, particularly in the economic and mili- tary fields. The oil and arms embargo that the interna- tional community pledged itself to uphold has proved in- effective. The political, economic and social isolation that South Africa clearly deserves has been breached. The conclusion is obvious: what we need is not more resolu- tions and declarations, but simply effective implementa- tion of the existing resolutions. What is called for is sin- cerity, honesty and a sense of responsibility on' the part of those that continue to maintain economic and military ties with South Africa. My delegation, for its part, would like to reassure the Assembly of its continuing commitment, in principle and in practice, to the total boycott and isola- tion of the white minority regime for as long as it con- tinues to hold to its racist and colonial policies in south- ern Africa. 182. In the light of South Africa's intransigence, the need for increased efforts by the international community to mobilize public opinion against the regime is all the greater. We are therefore encouraged by the efforts of the United Nations Council for Namibia and other bodies within the United Nations system to bring about greater public awareness of the situation in Namibia. We wish on this occasion to express our appreciation to the Council for the constructive role it is undertaking in order to bring about an end to South Africa's illegal control over Namibia. 183. In conclusion, I wish to reiterate on behalf of my delegation our continuing support for the people of Namibia, led by SWAPO, their legal and authentic repre- sentative, in their just struggle to achieve freedom, self- determination and independence in a united Namibia. It is our firm conviction that Security Council resolution 435 (1978) remains the only basis for the peaceful implemen- tation of the United Nations plan for the independence of the Territory. We call upon the international community to rally behind the people of Namibia in their just strug- gle to bring about an end to the illegal occupation of their territory, for an independent and free Namibia constitutes an indispensable element in the elimination of a serious threat to international peace and security. 186. Brought within the framework of the activities of the United Nations, the people of Namibia has been awaiting the recovery of its sovereignty for more than 30 years. Since the earliest years of its existence, the United Nations has been faced with a great and unprecedented challenge, for that challenge is a challenge to human dig- nity, a grave attack on basic human rights, an attack on the political stability of an entire region of a continent- in short, an outright attack on peace. 187. Yet the signatories to the Charter envisaged the de- velopment of relations among peoples in harmony and peace. Thus it is that the circle of free nations constantly grows; thus it is that the peoples have broken through the limiting frontiers of these nations to strengthen and ex- pand their field of co-operation. At the beginning of this session, the Assembly welcomed three new Members. The Head of State of Mali, in his address to the Assem- bly on 2 October [23rd meeting], congratulated two of them. On behalf of my country's Government, I should like to carry out a dual duty: to congratulate Antigua and Barbuda on the recovery of its freedom, and to pay a tribute to the United Nations for its tireless work for the cause of the freedom of peoples. It has made its contribu- tion to th~ struggle for the liberation of Namibia within the context of the peaceful settlement of disputes, al- though between it and the racist regime of South Africa there is a conflict about the meaning of Chapter VII of the Charter. Indeed, the United Nations is continuing tirelessly its attempts to make the racist regime of South Africa listen to reason. The latter's response was summed up in the statement of the President of t-l1ali from the ros- trum on 2 October when he said that the South African policy in Namibia remained what it had always been, namely, a policy of bloody repression, evasion, territorial expansion and inadmissible attacks on international peace and security. 188. Five Western Powers took the initiative of estab- lishing a constructive dialogue with South Africa in order to aid in the peaceful settlement of the Namibian crisis. There, again, on the part of Pretoria there was evasive- ness, hedging and duplicity. 189. The process towards the independence of Namibia is irreversible. It cannot be otherwise because the people of Namibia cannot deny its own nature by accepting the role of a slave people; it cannot forsake its political and cultural heritage; it must build its economic future on its own resources. And the United Nations cannot be the grave-digger for its own institutions; it cannot destroy it- self by countenancing serious violations of its Charter. 190. The struggle for the independence of Namibia has a dual objective, namely, to answer the brutal force of 191. The relentless and always successful struggle against South Africa carried on by SWAPO, the sole au- thentic representative of the people of Namibia, therefore enjoys the legitimate right which the Charter confers on all peoples to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security. 192. To hasten the victory the United Nations has adopted a series of measures, among which we might mention Security Council resolution 435 (1978), which was adopted without any reservation or hesitation by any member of the Security Council. That clear and concise resolution must be applied Rigorously. Any attempt ·to limit its scope, to deviate from its fundamental goals, would be a denial of international commitments freely en- tered into, and an inadmissible infringement on the right of peoples to self-determination. It is for the people of Namibia alone to determine the form of the future admin- istration of its Territory in conformity with its profound aspirations and its political, economic, social and cultural circumstances. 193. We are confident of the success of the liberation struggle of the Namibian people. We have confidence in the future, because we know that South Africa will never be able to reverse the course of that struggle. Like other people that have made enormous sacrifices for freedom, the people of Namibia will destroy Pretoria's vain dream of continuing to keep Namibia by force. 194. South Africa has understood nothing about history; it has understood nothing about the civilization of peo- ples. The policy of bloody repression of the people of Namibia and flagrant aggression against its neighbours, particularly the People's Republic of Angola, from the in- ternational Territory of Namibia, which has been trans- formed into a bastion of war, sadly will continue for some time, plunging innocent families into mourning and de- stroying gratuitously the goods accumulated through the creative genius of man. But this policy will have the same sorry results as all other regimes based on racial hatred and the mania for expansion. . 195. South Africa has voluntarily exiled itself from the international community through its continuing violations of the fundamental principles of the Charter. 196. The United Nations has before it the specific pro- posals contained in the report of· the United Nations Council for Namibia [A/36/24] and.in that of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implemen- tation of the Declaration on the Independence of Colonial Countries and Peoples [A/36/23/Rev.I, chap. VIII]. 197. The delegation of Mali would like to pay a tribute to the members of these two bodies of the United Nations, not only for the clarity and precision of the conclusions they have produced but also for the numerous initiatives undertaken to make international public opinion more aware of the fate of the heroic Namibian people and the dangers to peace caused by the apartheid regime. 198. My delegation is convinced that the Assembly will adopt the conclusions in these reports unanimously and that, at its present deliberations on the question of Namibia, the resulting resolution will support morally, politically and materially the liberation struggle of the 199. I said a few moments ago that we have every con- fidence in a bright future common to all men and to all peoples, without distinction as to race or colour. It js our task to build that future of hannony, co-operation and peace. It is our task to fight and destroy any system which dangerously undermines this great undertaking. General Moussa Traore, the President of Mali, has said this from this rostrum when he declared: "All diplomatic, political, economic and military means should be used to combat a system which has become a source of shame for mankind. We do not have the right to fail in so urgent a duty. To act other- wise would be to betray the mandate entrusted to us by our peoples to defend them against hatred and vio- lence." [23rd meeting, para. 20.]

The question of Namibia has figured on the agenda of the General Assembly since 1946. The future of Namibia was definitely determined on 27 October 1966 when the General Assembly, by its resolution 2145 (XXI), terminated South Africa's Mandate and resolved to assume direct responsibility for the Terri- tory. 201. The United Nations Council for Namibia, estab- lished by the General Assembly as the legal Adnunister- ing Authority for Namibia until independence, has done commendable work in mobilizing world support for the cause of Namibia and in preparing the Namibian people to assume the responsibilities of administering their coun- try on its independence. The delegation of Pakistan fully supports the recommendations contained in the Council's report to the Assembly. We also express our deep appre- ciation to the President of the Council, Mr. Lusaka of Zambia, for the dynamic and effective leadership he has provided to the Council. 202. The Namibian people's heroic struggle to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination and indepen- dence has experienced various vicissitudes. In the wake of the rallying of world public opinion to that people's just struggle for national independence, a decisive stage was reached when all the parties concerned accepted Security Council resohltion 435 (1978), which envisaged the sign- ing of a cease-fire, the establishment of a demilitarized zone, the deployment of UNTAG and the holding of free and fair elections under the supervision and control of the United Nations. For a time it looked as though Namibia's peaceful accession to independence was within sight. 203. However, the hopes raised by the consensus reached on resolution 435 (1978) were dashed when South Africa, showing its true colours, reneged on its commitment at the pre-implementation meeting, held' at Geneva in January this year. In a transparent show of obstructionism, it cast unwarranted doubts on the impar- tiality of the United Nations in supervising free and fair elections in Namibia and demanded constitutional guaran- tees for the protection of the white minority before Namibia acceded to independence. To quote from the Secretary-General's report on the pre-implementation meeting, "It became clear, in the course of the meeting, ihat the South African Government was not yet prepared 205. The volte-face on the part of South Africa called for decisive and determined ~ction to secure its com- pliance with the Council's decisions. Regrettably, the Council did not prove itself equal to the challenge. Owing to the unfortunate triple veto cast on 30 April 1981, the Security Council was prevented from taking effective ac- tion against the obdurate racist regime. The justifiably an- gry reaction of the international community found its ex- pression in the convening of the eighth emergency special s~ssion of last September. The Assembly, reiterat- ing its position of principle on the question of Namibia, demanded the unconditional implementation of resolution 435 (1978) and called upon Member States to take legis- lative, administrative and other meaSLires, as appropriate, in order effectively to isolate South Africa politically, economically, militarily and culturally. 206. The results of the activities undertaken during the last two months by the Western contact group on Namibia are not fully known. Yesterday [64th meeting], the For- eign Secretary of SWAPO, Mr. Peter Mueshihange, informed the General Assembly that, contrary to the propaganda regarding the alleged progress on a Namibian settlement, South Africa has not so far given any clear indication of accepting the early implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). On the other hand, however, the contact group claims to be making steady progress towards the goal of Namibia's indepen- dence. We earnestly hope that this is so. The contact group's objective of implementing resolution 435 (1978) in 1982 would be frustrated if in the process the United Nations independence plan was revised or diluted in any manner. 207. The inordinate delay in the withdrawal of South Africa from Namibia has taxed the world community's patience to the furthest limit. South Africa's spurning of the United Nations initiative is attributable to the SUPP0:"i of external forces which stand to profit from the con- tinued subjugation of the Namibian people and South Af- rica's massive arms build-up through the importation of anns and the development of its nuclear capability. If the independence of Namibia were delayed any longer. the belief voiced by some that Western countries were in col- lusion with South Africa in undermining Security Council resolution 435 (1978) and depriving the Namibian people of their hard-won victories in the struggle for national lib- eration would certainly gain ground. 208. South Africa, in total defiance of the United Na- tions, not only continues illegally to occupy Namibia but is using the Territory as a springboard for launching un- provoked aggressive raids against the neighbouring coun- tries. Only re~ently, Pakistan joined the world community in condemning the racist regime in the strongest terms for its aggression against AngoJa and its flagrant violation of Angola's sovereignty and territoriarintegrity. It is a matter of concern that the Security Council has failed to exercise its responsibilities in that case of armed aggression. It is incumbent on the international community to extend every possible assistance ~o the front-line States in order t,o en- 210. As the racist regime drags its feet on the imple- mentation of the United Nations independence plan, it has stepped up the militarization of Namibia, enforced con- scription in the Territory and increased its oppression of the Namibian people. Undaunted by these tremendous odds, the Namibian people, under the leadership of their sole and authentic representative, SWAPO, are vigorously pursuing their armed struggle to achieve self-determina- tion, freedom and national independence in a united Namibia. 211. The situation calls for the application of maximum pressure on Pretoria to force it to align its policies with the repeatedly expressed verdict of the international com- munity. Finally, motivated by its Islamic and non-aligneQ character, Pakistan has always extended its full support to the just struggle of all peoples against every manifestation of colonialism, imperialism and racism. Our unshakeable commitment to the right of all peoples to self-determina- tion is rooted in our faith. Consistent with this policy, Pakistan reiterates its pledge to continue to extend un- qualified support to the valiant people of Namibia in their legitimate struggle, under the leadership of SWAPO, for freedom and national independence. Undoubtedly, their victory against the vilest forms of racism and colonial domination is certain. 212. Mr.' SASSI (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) (mterpreta- tionfrom Arabic): As we all know, the General Assembly was convened recently in an emergency special ses~ion to consider the question of Namibia. This question is one of the major preoccupations not only of my delegation but also of the international community as a whole, as a re- sult of the deterioration of the situation in southern Af- rica, and in particular in Namibia. This deteriorating sit- uation is mainly the result of the persistence of the racist entity in its aggressive terrorist policy, which afflicts the whole region and brought about the occupation of Namibia. That entity has made the Territory a military arsenal and a springboard for brutal acts of aggression against neighbouring countries. The premeditated brutal aggression committed by the racist regime against Angola and the occupation of a part of that country's territory with the support of the imperialist Powers, first and fore- most the United States of America, are stilI fresh in our minds. This caused considerable human casualties and material damage and was condemned by the United Na- tions and other international forums as a flagrant violation of the principles of international peace and security, as well as a new phase in the intensification of military at- tacks against progressive forces on the African continent. That odious aggression gave rise to considerable indigna- tion and denunciation. All States called for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of South African troops from the territory of Angola. The exception was the United States, which would not try to curb the racist en- 219. The United States stance has helped the racist re- ,;. tit::~u~:~re:d i~S:~:==::~~~gl::::~~::::= :~:.:.~:m~4i~!t. 214. Thus the complete agreement between the racist policy of Pretoria and the imperialist policy of the United States becomes clear. In the field of foreign policy, for example, meetings have taken place between officials of the United States Administration and officials of the racist entity in Pretoria, the most recent being, as we all know, the meeting between the United ·States representative to the United Nations and intelligence officials from the Pre- toria regime. Those meetings focused on the maintenance and strengthening of relations between Washington and Pretoria and on increasing what the United States Admin- istration termed "murual understanding in many areas". The most important subject, of course, was that of their military relations. There is actually an agreement between the United States and the racist Government of Pretoria in the field of nuclear co-operation, in accordance with which the United States exports uranium to the South Af- rican racist regime. 215. The general director of foreign affairs in the Gov- ernment of Pretoria stated that he visited a group of United States officials, among them Mr. George Fed, head of the United States Department of Nuclear Energy; and Mr. John 80right, a high-ranking official in the field of nuclear energy at Pretoria, in order to co-ordinate co- operation in the nuclear field. 216. An American specialist in political science, Mr. Robert Roth, in an analysis of South African affairs, stated: "Pretoria has benefited for two decades from United States co-operation in the field of nuclear energy and a nuclear reactor was actually built in Valindaba, near Pretoria, by experts from an Am~rican frrm." 217. The Agreement for Co-operation Between the Gov- ernment of the United States of America and the Govern- ment of the Union of South Africa, signed in 1957 by the two countries, was extended in 1974 for a further 33 years. Under this Agreement, the United States promised to provide South Africa with uranium. 218. It is not surprising that the racist entity's acts of aggression against Angola should increase and that it should blatantly ig~ore the demand of the United Nations that it grant independence to Namibia, especially after Reagan declared that the racist regime was an ally of the United States. 220. The persistent illegal occupation of Namibia has a significant place in the designs of the United States Ad- ministration. The policy of confrontation and flagrant challenge of the African peoples which has been adopted by the United States simply reveals the falseness of its claim that it seeks a peaceful settlement of the question of Namibia. The United States has clearly stated that its position regarding Africa will be in hannony with its in- ternational aspirations and policy as a super-Power, and that its narrow economic and strategic interests in Mrica take precedence over the basic principles of the United Nations and the interests of the African peoples seeking to achieve national development and freedom. 221. We' are once again considering this issue, but this time we are absolutely sure that the racist entity in Pre- toria could not by itself challenge international public opinion and the resolutions of the General Assembly and of the Security Council were it not for the political, moral and material support provided to this entity by the so- called Western contact group, headed by the United States. At a time when the United States claims to be seeking a settlement of the problem, it supports this en- tity in several political areas, such as by exercising its right of veto in the Security Council against any resolu- tion aimed at denouncing the junta of Pretoria for its acts of aggression against the front-line States and by provid- ing unlimited military and material support directly to the racist regime or through its transnational corporati9ns. 222. The international community remembers with bit- terness that, despite the fact that 15 years have elapsed since the General Assembly adopted resolution 2145 (XXI), terminating South Africa's Mandate over Namibia, and despite the efiorts exerted by the United Nations, es- pecially the Uni~ed Nations Council for Namibia, which is truly worthy of commendation, the situation in and around Namibia is more serious than ever and threatens peace and security not only in southern Africa but throughout the entire world. 223. The question of Namibia has been debated, at length both within the framework of this Organization and in other international and regional forums, such as those of the OAU and the non-aligned movement. International public opinion is aware that this is a question of illegal occupation, of imperialism, which must be eliminated as soon as possible. 228. My delegation maintains that the delaying tactics and hollow promises of the Pretoria regime and the West- em countries, headed by the United States, are futile. CODbselquently, it Il·s vlitalthlYonthecessary for ~e .Gesneralth AAsf- sem y to state c ear y at e racist entity m ou - rica must comply fully with the resolutions of the United 224. Three years ago, the Security Council adopted res- Nations, especially resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 olution 435 (1978), which is the only internatiomilly ac- (1978), without any pre-conditions. In the event of non- cepted basis for the settlement of the problem. After tre- implementation and non-compliance, it should be held re- ~~':;':-;;-'~~""";:~"~""'" ~~..~._..." . . .' ' .~~~.;t;IIiir,~.,:",,,,,,._~,,,,,.'~':'-~."'"~~4f."X-~,,,~..~_~ regime had begun to retreat from its commitments and affmned its unwillingness to implement resolution 435 (1978). Since that time, manoeuvres by the Western con- tact group, headed by the United States, have begun with a view to amending the Unite4 Nations plan endorsed in resolution 435 (1978). Actually, these manoeuvres are nothing but an attempt to put the process of the peaceful political solution of the problem back where it started and hence to perpetuate and prolong the occupation of Namibia and continue to plunder its resources. 225. The Western contact group, which formul~ted the United Nations plan for the independence of NZ"lrlnbia, is supposed to be made up of the States most anxio~s to see th.at this plan is implemented. But it is clear that it has been trying to obstruct this plan since its adoption. The reasons behind that are well known: the Western States have economic and strategic interests and investments in Namibia and South Africa. Those States realize that it will be in their interests for the racist domination in South Africa and Namibia to continue and for the people of Namibia to be faced with a/ait accompli so that they will accept what the racist occupying entity desires-that is, the installation of a puppet regime in Namibia made up of the agents of South Africa in order that the transnational corporations may continue their destructive activities in Namibia and deplete the resources of the region by trans- ferring them to the Western countries. In this respect, it is noteworthy that, despite all the resolutions conce.ming the protection of the natural resources of Namibia, and de- spite Decree No. 1 enacted by the United Nations Council for Namibia,8 the resources of the region are consistently plundered and the international community is fully aware of this. The report of the \Jnited Nations Council for Namibia mentions the fact that the principal firms in Namibia are the fIrmS that are based in the Western coun- tries of the contact group. 226. The hope of ~aching a peaceful settlement to the question of Namibia is decreasing as a result of the preju- dice of the Western countries and their bias in favour of the apartheid regime of Pretoria. Consequently, the West- ern countries cannot act as honest mediators, and it be- hooves the United Nations fully to assume its responsibil- ity to ensure the rapid accession to independence of Namibia. 227. The intransigence of the racist regime in South Af- rica and the United States impels us to wonder what steps can be taken by the non-aligned movement and peace- loving forces to support the struggle of the valiant people of Namibia under the leadership of SWAPO to regain its freedom and independence. 229. I shall now refer to the elements put forward by the head of my delegation in his statement before the General Assembly on 7 OctObei 1981 [29th meeting] as providing the basis on which the problem of Namibia could be solved. The first is support for the armed strug- gle of the people of Namibia, because the liberty of peo- ples is not a gift that is bestowed but has to be won, especially as our Organization is dominatesi by the right of veto, which plays a major part in protecting the inter- ests of imperialist, Rlscist and racist countries. The sec- ond is the reaffirmation of the inalienable right of the people of Namibia to self-determination, freedom and na- tional independence, in accordance with the United Na- tions Charter and General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV). The third element is emphasis on the fact that there are two main parties to the dispute, SWAPO, the sole legitimate representative of the people of Namibia strug- gling for the independence of that Territory, with United . Nations support, and the racist Pretoria regime, which is occupying the Territory illegally. The fourth element is decisive and speedy implementation of resolution 435 (1978) on the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia, without any amendment, in such a way as to ensure the full independence of Namibia and the sov- ereignty of its people, under the leadership of SWAPO, over all its entire territory, including Walvis Bay. The fifth element is the impositjon on the racist regime of South Africa of the sanctions provided for in the resolu- tion adopted at the eighth emergency special session of the General Assembly, thereby compelling that racist The meeting rose at 7 p.m. NOTES I AlN:..ICYJ/f6J. : ugal Cons~qu~nc~sfor Stat~s of the Continued P"s~nc~ of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (/970), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 197/. p. 16. J South West Africa, Second Phase. Judgment, I.CJ. Reports 1966. p. 6. ~ Uniio Nacional para a Independencia Total de Angola. SMovimento Popular de Libertll~io de Angola. 6 United Nations publication. Sales No. E.81.1.10. p/~ment No. 24. annex 11. , See AlN:..131/PV.36S. p/~ment for January, F~bruary and March 1981, document S/14333. para. 19.