A/37/PV.105 General Assembly

Wednesday, Dec. 15, 1982 — Session 37, Meeting 105 — New York — UN Document ↗

THIRTY-SEVENTH SESSION

32. Ques1ion of Namibia (cotlti;;:iled): (a~) R~port of the Speci~i \;ommittee on the Situati~n .with regard tu the Impiementatinn of(he Dedaration on the Granting of Independen~;eto C~!oni~A CoonrJ tries and Peoples; (b) Report of tbe Unit~d ~5~tioi1s Council for NQmibia; (c) fieports of the Secretary-General 1. Th(~: ?RESIDJENT: I should like to draw the atten- tion of representatives to the fact that the General AssemUy has before it five. draft resolutions recom- mended by th~ United i~ations Council for Namibia in hs report [A/37/24, para. 786]. 2. Mr. de La BARRii DE ·.~ANTEUIL (France) (irderp;-etation!rcm French): T have the honour.today to 8toeak cn beharf ~}f the Covemments ef Canada, Pmrice, tbe Fedt.~al Republic of (j.,;rmany, the United Kingdcm of Great Britain anJ N0l1hern Ireland and ~he United Statcw of America. 3. As all members of the Assembly are aware, cur five Governments have entered into negotiations to secure an. internationally recognized settlement of the Namibian problem. A solution to this problem is long overdue. In the oast few months, intensive efforts have been made to overcome the remaining obstacles. 4. During July and August, consultations we·re held in New York between the contact group and represen- tatives of the front-line States, Nigeria and the South West Africa People's Organization [SWAPO], and there were concurrent consultations with South Africa. These talks en~bled us to reach agreen:tent on impor- tant aspects of the settlement proposal that were out- standing. The results of these consultations were con- veyed to the Secretary-General in September at a meeting in which the five countries of the contact group, the front-l~ne States, Nigeria and SWAPO participated. 5. Our Foreign Ministers met in New York on 1Octo- ber and welcomed the acceptance by the parties of the constitutional principles which are to govern the Namibian Constituent Assembly. They also noted that substantial progress had been made on the question of the impartiality, and on the size, composition and arrangements for deployment of the military com- ponent of ·UNTAG. In this regard, we should like to express our gratitude to the Secretary-General and his stafffor their valuable contribution. We shl'uld also like to pay a tribute to the Secretariat for its efforts to complete preparations for the UNTAG operation. Wednesday, 15 December 1982, at 11.10 a.m. ~EW YORK 6. Even with this progress, however, some issues still have to be o;ettied. fhe commitment of the five Western countrie~i to a succes8ful conclusion of this exercise remains firm, and the independence of Na- mibia remains our goal. We believe that it ili in the interests of the international community, and more specifically the sovereign States of southern Africa, that this problem be resolved as soon'as possible. Our Governments remain convinced that only throi,gh negotiations will it be possiblz to achieve a lasting settlement whiie ensuring Namibiail independence, which is what we all seek. 7, Neither in form nor in substance do the draft reSOittiion~ betore ml today r~cognize either the §eriommess of the present situation or the opportunity that now e.x~sts to find a peaceful sulution. Thr.;y will not bring the goal of Namibian indepencie~ce any clm;er. AlthQugh the five Western countries have reaervations on numerous a~pects of thes!': texts, we shall abstann so as not to jeopardize our roie in the negotiations. OUI" abstentions are purely procedural and in no way nmply any position on the intrinsic merits of these draft resolutions. 8. Intensive consultations are continuing on tne .remaining unsettled issues. The contact group wishes once again to emphasize the importance of the co- oper~tionofall the parties concerned to.ensure the suc- cess of ('ur common efforts. 9. The opportunity now exists to bring about a set- tlement which would make it possible both to strengthen peace and aecullty and to foster economic development in the region. We see no real alternative to these negotiations other than the continuation of the conflicts in the area, with the ever-increasing suffering that would result fer the peoples o( southern Africa. We denounce violence from whatever source either to promote or to prevent change. We call on the inter- national community for its support in the effort to achieve our common ~al of peaceful negotiated settlement. 10. ~r. KIBANDA (Central African Republic)(inter- pretation from French): Regarded as one of the most burning issues of the United Nation~, the situation in Namibia, which is once again under consid -ration this year, has virtuallyfilled the foreground ofthe world scene and has been a focus of international public opinion for more than 20 years now. As in a tale from H A Thousand and One Nights", in which the East abounded, Namibia is, all thin~s considered, a victim of the wealth nature has lavished upon it. The over- flowing riches within its confines excite greed and attract vultures of every kind. 11. 0, Niunibia,poor Namibia, its future in suspense, frozen, paralysed. 0, people of Nami~ia, a people abandoned, denied their existence, denied their sacrific~don the altar ofthe notodety ofmultinationals, those orac1~s who determine ifthe weather si1all be fair or foul. 12. We had thought, perhaps too euphorically, that 1982 would be the year of decision, the historic year that would hear not the clash ofweapons, the whistling of bombs or the buzzing of South African helicopters in the airspace of neighbouring States firing their deadly shells, but instead the sound ofa hymn to peace and independence, a symphony of joy, gaiety and popular rejoicing. 13. We had hoped-perhaps with unduly naive optimism, wittingly or unwittingly forgetting the logic ofpolitics and its vicissitudes-that a large part of the South African colonialist regime would fall this year, opening a breach in the edifice of apartheid. 14. The members of the contact group, with their peace plan approved by the Security Council, had given us grounds tofeed these illusions and nurture this hope. But it was all in vain. Despite substantial concessions made by SWAPO, peace, which should have led Namibia to independence-the finest flower of rhetoric-and put an end once and for all to the suf- ferings of the Namibian people, was crushed under the weight of thousands of tons of bombs falling from the skies-bombs unleashed daily by the South African army-was crushed under the weight of all the acts of mass destruction committed against neig!1bouring States, and was indefinitely postponed. Fate decided otherwise; the will of the greatPowers was not merci- ful. 0, cruel fate! 15. A problem of decolonization, born after the Second World Warin the clash ofweapons and fighting, the question of Namibia can have no rational, just or lasting solution unless it is within the framework ofthe process which b~gan 22 years ago in the United Nations with the adoption of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, contained in General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV). 16. In adopting that resolution, which is a milestone in the annals ofthe Organization, the United Nations took a stand for posterity, stealing a march on history and underwriting the struggles and wars that subjugated countries and peoples suffering under colonial domination were waging in their desire for freedom and independence and to affirm their national identities. 17. Resolution 1514 (XV), with its programme of action, based upon respect for moral values and nm- damental freedoms set forth in the Universal Decla- ration of Human Rights, is, with regard to the irrever- sibility ofhistory, one ofthe major decisions ever taken by the United Nations. It strengthened the universality of the Organization's mission by restoring to it its very reason for existence at a time when peace, in its new conception, means not only the end of hostilities but also respect for and safeguarding of these moral values and fundamental freedoms, the constant violation of which is a source offriction and disruption State~ that are its neighbours. Yet, Article 76 of the Charter of the United Nations defines the primary mission of the Trusteeship System as: - ••... to further international peace and security; "to promote the political, economic, social and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the Trust Territories and their progressive development towards self-government or independence as may be appropriate to the particular circumstances of each Territory and its peoples and the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned ... "to encourage respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion ...". 20. Thus, the final aim ofthe mandate given the trus- tee under the provisions of the above-mentioned Ar- ticle could not be clearer. It can be summed up in one word-independence. 21. Instead_ of that and quite to the contrary, South Africa has sought to stifle the legitimate aspirations of the courageous people of Namibia to freedom, justice and independence, the very basis of human dignity, to break that people's desire (or equity and its propensity for ethics and, finally, to entrench its illegal presence. 22. Instead of that, South Africa has made Namibia an impregnable fortress from which its murderous raids, its hoplites armed to the teeth, are launched to attack, invade and occupy States in the region; to burn entire villages and raze them; to kill men, women and children savagely. Horrifying spectacles emerge after each raid, poignant pictures which revolt the human 24. Who in this body, which inspires detente and peace, would have the courage to sanction or approve this act of schizophrenia? Which State Member of the United Nations, whose Charter advocates dialogue, concerted action and the peaceful settlement of disputes among States, could allow such a thing? Furthermore, who would dare stand by as a silent accomplice or in approval? 25.. Who? The Central African Republic, for its part, most categorically condemns this abominable attack. It expresses to the Kingdom of Lesotho its com- plete sympathy in this difficult time when its security and independence are threatened. 26. In these circumstances, the deadlock is total. This cripples the prospects of the Territory cfNamibia and paralyses it. It creates, both inside and outside, a dangerous situation, because of the political and mili- tary implications involved and the threat to interna- tional peace and security it represents. It seriously harms the prestige of the United Nations, which is accused ofineffectiveness; it considerably weakens itB credibility and detracts from its image. 27. In view of the facts, which clearly demonstrate the total failure of South Africa to carry out its highly important mission, to achieve in due time the objectives set by the Charter of the United Nations and to satisfy justifiable hopes, and in view of the warlike attitude ofthe Pretoria Government and its obvious intention to make Namibia an integrated province of South Africa, the General Assembly, in resolution 2145 (XXI) of 27 October 1966, declared illegal South Africa's pres- ence in and occupation of Namibia and entrusted the administration of the Territory to the United Nations Council for Namibia, established pursuant to reso- lution 2248 (S-V). In this r~ard, the advisory opinion of the International Court oflusiice-of 2f June-1971,1 which confirmed that resolution, is significant in more than one way. 28. The establishment ofthe Council, whose primary responsibility is to ensure the advancement of the Namibian people to self-determination and indepen- dence with strict respect for its dign!ty-,. identi~y a.':ld national unity, is an eloquent expression of the United Nations mission of universal peace and its desire to ensure and guarantee, in accordance with its responsibilities, world peace and security. The assumption of responsibility for the administration of the Territory of Namibia by the Council, which im- plicitly terminated South Africa's Mandate, was to the credit of the United Nations, which sought to give proper expression to its determination to work for a peaceful, happy and balanced world in which social justice and the welfare and well-being ofman would be enormou~ and superhuman. 32. This is an appropriate time to pay homage to the memory ofthe heroes offreedom who have giv~n their precious lives in a sacred cause, who have sacrificed' themselves for the Namibian nation, who have been buried without tombs or epitaphs, their blackened ashes carried by the wind of freedom and their blood spilled so that the history ofan independent and sover- ""elgn Namibia may inspire future generations. 33. We must rejoice in the fact that SWAPO, its hopes having been fulfilled by its recognition by the inter- national community as the sole representaHve of the Namibian people, has proved its political rL]aturity by showigg willi!!8~ess to co-o...Per~tein a!!y" ~e"~rch for a soluHon, fully subscribing to the settlement plan approved by the Security Council on the basis ofreso- 36. Need we recall that, beyond the divergences which may' appear in their overall view of the world, their perception and conception oflife and society and their analyses of and approaches to the solution of the many problems confronting the world, the States Mem- bers of the United Nations show a sincere desire to contribute to the building of a better world-a world of justice and freedom in which the focus of interest is man himself, for his happiness and well-being? 37. That is how history-the great history which is to be found at the crossroads of civilizations, and in the great schools ofthought which have deeply marked our contemporary world-is made. How therefore can the Pretoria regime remain insensitive to the positive development of events and not understand the meaning of the irreversibility of history? 38. Benjamin Constant, in On Conquest and Usur- pation, said: "Woe to those who, believing themselves invincible, defy mankind and seek through it, because they have no other instrument, to bring about up- heavals of which it disapproves and miracles it does not desire".

Mr. Sikaulu ZMB

Zambia #6537

Sixteen years "ave elapsed since the United Nations terminated South Africa's mandate over Namibia and assumed direct responsibility for the Territory until its independence. No one could have imagined at that historic moment in 1966 that to this day Namibia would still be illegally occupied by South Africa, and its peopl~ still denied their inalienable right to fre~dom and independence. Indeed, no one could have imagined that young Na- mibians born at the time of the adoption of General Assembly resolution 2145 (XXI) and those born after that would today fill the ranks of the freedom fighters seekingthe liberation oftheircountry from illegal South African oc-cupation. 40. It is not fodack ofeffort on the part ofthe United Nations that Namibia is still not free. Nor is the iong- delayed independence of Namibia due to any lack of co-operation by the Namibian people, under the leadership of SWAPO, in regard to efforts to promote a peaceful settlement. 46. There is no question but that the South African regime is intransigent. It is a regime that is the very epi- tome ofall that is evil hJi southern Africa. It represents a clique of diehard white racists with an avowed commitment, through the ill-conceived and false doc- trine of apartheid, to the exploitation of the black majority of South Africa and Namibia and to the plun- dering of the rich natural resources of the region. . - . 47. South Africa refuses to co-operate in the imple- mentation ofresolution 435 (1978) because it is afraid of an inevitable SWAPO victory in free and fair elections linkin~ Namibia's independence to the obviously extral~eous issue of the presence of Cuban troops in Angola would, in effect, per.petuate the denial. to the Namibian people of their freedom and indepen- dence. SI. Zambia is therefore strongly and categorically opposed to the linkage being made between Namibia's independence and the withdrawal ofCuban troops from Angola. Our dut; is to ensure the implementation of resolution 435 (1)78), which deals exclusively with the question ofNamibia. The question ofNamibia must be solved on its own merits in accordance with the let;. ter and spirit of that resolution. It is morally reprehen- sible and politically unacceptable to us to sacrifice the freedom and independence of the Namibian people on the altar of ideological expedience. The other members ofthe Western CQntact group should have the courage of the3r convictions and tell the United States that its insistence on linking Namibia's independence to the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola is wrong and contrary to resolution 435 (1978). They _ should speak out and bring pressure to bear on the United States to drop its insistence on the linkage, lest they be perceived to be part and parcel of the United Slates position. I must say that the statement we just heard from the representative ofFrance, who spoke on behalf of the Western contact group, did not address the heart of the problem, namely, South Africa's in- transigence, encouraged by the position of the United States. To be an honest broker, one must have aclearvision ofthe issues and not assist thosewho seek to distort them. 54. We, in Zambia, have time and again pointed out that apartheid is not only a crime against humanity but also a serious threat to international peace and security. In defence of apartheid, South Africa persists in its illegal occupation of Namibia and uses the Territory as a launching pad for its acts'of aggression against front-line States. Indeed, South Africa has, through its actions, demonstrated that it will stop at nothing to protect its criminal policies and practices ofapartheid. SS. No words would adequately express the revu.sion and indignation that we in Zambia feel at the barbaric act of aggression by South Africa against Lesotho last week. Nothing could speak more eloquently about the threatto international peace and securitythat South Africa represents than its decision to attack Lesotho. No pretext whatsoever can justify the vicious, callous and dastardly attack by South Africa, a big country with colossal military power, against ~esotho, a small, defenceless _and peace-loving neighbour. Zambia strongly condemns the South African act of aggression against Lesotho. Zambia also strongly con- demns South Africa's aggression against Mozambique committed almost simultaneously with that against Lesotho. 56. It is clear that, for southern Africa to enjoy peace and security, there is an urgent need. to terminate South Africa's illegaloccupation of Namibia, to put a· stop to its acts of aggression against independent Mrican Statesand ttleliminate the scourgeofapartheid. The international community as a whole must re- dedicate itself to this end. Certainly, we in Africa are concerned about the policies of some powerful- Mem- bers oftbeUnited Nationslwhich seem to give succour and solace to South Africa and unquestionably encour- age it in its recalcitrance and defiance of the decisions of the Organization. We are, in particular, concerned aoout the United States policy of so-called construc- tive engagement, and we would urge a new policy of constructive disengagement from the racist regime of South Africa. 57. The statement made in this debate by Mr. Mueshi- hange, Secretary for Foreign Relations of SWAPO [102nd meeting], was important and eloquent tes- timony of the determination of the Namibian patriots to struggle for the freedom and independence· of their country. While making clear the indomitable will at:.j steadfast determination of the Namibian enorm(}'~s profits and the strategic and military privileges which they have obtained through the· existence of the racist regime in Namibia. The support received by the racist regime from Western banks and companies has contributed to the entrenchment of the apartheid policy in South Africa and the perpetuation of the illegal occupation of Namibia. It is regrettable that, in spite ofthe resolutions that have been adopted by the United Nations calling for the boycotting ofthe racist apartheid regime of South Africa, the Western countries nevertheless continue to encourage their companies to invest in South Africa. 63. In thIs connection, a report prepared by the Inter- national Confederation of Free Trade Unions, dated Sept~mber 1981, refers to the fact that the number of companies with investments in South Africa in- creased from 1,888 in 1978 to 3,035 in 1981. It is to be noted that the highest rate ofgrowth has been achieved by the companies of the Western countries members ofthe so-called contact group on Namibia. The number 67. The racist regime of South Africa is able to cling to its occupation of Namibia because of the total sup- port it receives from the Western countries, which con- sider it to be a protector of their interests in southern Africa. It obtains assistance also from another racist regime: the Zionist entity in occupied Palestine. The many points of similarity between the two regimes and their identical nature and aggressiveness are obvious to everyone. The racist regime in South Africa is denying the black majority its basic rights and is denying the Namibian people its right to self-deter- mination and independence. The racist Zionist entity is v~mtion of Article 2, paragraph 7, of the United Nations Charter... ••... and emphasize unequivocally that the per- sistence ofsuch attempts would... constitute notonly hegemonic manipulation of the situation in and around Namibia in order to prolong the illegal occupation of Namibia and ~he oppression of Na- mibians~ but also a blatant interference in the internal affairs of Angola." 72. In spite ofthe long time that has elapsed since the adoption ofSecurity Council resolution 418(1977), con- cerning the arms embargo against South Africa, that embargo has yet to be strictly applied. Thanks to the connivance ofthe Zionist entity and \Vesten'l countries, the racist regime has been able to obtain large quanti- ties of weapons. A bulletin of the International Insti- tute for Strategic Studies, in London, states that South African naval bases now house seven Israeli-built high- speed attack ships-equipped with Israeli-made missiles, and seven further craft are under construction. Last May, ihe Sunday Times of' London reported that, according to a book soon to be published in Israel, Israel and South Africa together are developing a ballistic missile with a range of 1,500 miles, as well as a neutron bomb and various nuclear delivery systems. 73. Th~ assistance received by the racist regime of South Africa from some Western countries and the Zionist entity, the direct investments by transnational corporations and the technical assistance lavished on a.ti~n l.TIovements and ~ impose questionable solu- tions that would ultimately resu_~t in puppet regimes whose purpose would be submissively to serve the in- terests of the imperialist countries. 77. Finally, I wish to reaffirm the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya's unlimited support for the Namibian peo- ple in itsjust struggle, under the leadership ofSWAPO, for self-determimltion and independence. We shall con- 78. We reafIrrm our solidarity with the front-line States ill the face of the repeated attacks unleashed by the racist regime. We cond~mn South Africa's occu- pation pf a part, of Angola and fully stand by-and sup- port tile people, of that country. We condemn the aggres'sion ag.ainst Mozambique and stand by the people of Mozambique. My people wishes to reaffirm its support for the struggle of the people of Lesotho, and condemns the attacks by South Africa against that people.

Mr. Pastinen FIN

Finland #6538

Th~ erosion of the authority of the United Nations and the weakening of .its role in acting for the maintenance of international peace and security has been one of the central themes of this session of the General Assembly. The Sec- retary-General has emphasized this issue in his report on the work of the Organization [A/37/1]. In response to his appeal, the General Assembly has adopted by consensus a resolution designed to provide a basis for dealing with ,the question. 80. For more than 30 years, Namibia has been a chal- lenge to the will of the international community and a supreme test of the authority of the United Nations, which has assumed responsibility for the Territory. Sixteen years have passed since the General Assembly terminated South Africa's mandate over Namibia. Eleven years have passed since the International Court of Justice, on the initiative of the Government of Fin- land, gave an advisory opinion! which determined that South Africa's continued presence in Namibia is illegal. Six years have elapsed in painstaking negotiations since the adoption of Security Councii resolution 385 (1976). Four years h~ve gone by since the adoption of the United Nations plan for Namibia, in Security Coun- cil resolution 435 (1978). It is well to remember that the Government of South Africa has committed itself to that plan. 81. Yet, Namibia is still not free. The illegal occu- pation ofthat country continues. Not only is the people of Namibia denied its right of self-determ:.lation but under the present administration it is also denied the exercise of fundamental human rights. 82. The extended process of negotiations on Namibia on the basis of resolution 435 (1978) has taxed the patience of the-international community in general and of the African States in particular. Their disap- pointment is understandable, and we for our part wish to pay a tribute to the African front-line States and SWAPO for the statesmanship and restraint they have demonstrated. In spite of their frustration, they have left no avenue unsearched for reaching a peaceful set- tlement. The Finnish Government shares the convic- tion that negotiations, however painstaking and complicated, are not simply the only peaceful but also the only realistic way to achieve the goals ofthe United Nations in Namibia. That is why my Government, in close concert with otherNordic countries, has given its full support to the United Nations plan since the very beginning of the negotiations. We trust that all tho8e engaged in the process ofnegotiations will continue to again~tits neighbours, South Africa violates basic prin- ciples ofinternational behaviour. Its actions show that policies of internal repression breed external aggres- sion. This violence is further proof of the structural tension that is endemic in the region. Conversely, the settlement of the question of Namibia through 'an early, internationally acceptable settlement would alleviate the tension and shoul4 go a long way towards allaying the security concerns ofall nations in southern Africa. It would also remove a serious obstacle to their economic development. 85. The position of the Government of Finland on the question of Namibia is well known and remains unchanged. The illegal occupation of Namibia must be brought to an end. The people of Namibia must- be given the right to self-determination. This should be achieved through free and fair elections designed to create a democratic society with justice for all, on the basis of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). My country will continue to give humanitarian assistance to SWAPO and to all Namibians, both bilaterally and through the United Nations, as long as this process continues. We have also declared that Namibia, once independent, will become a major recipient of Finnish technical and economic assistance. 86. We believe that the possibility for a negotiated, pe~~eful settlement is still there. Yet, who can say for how long? If South Africa fails to grasp this oppor- tunity, then the United Nations must take fullrespon- sibility in the ensuing situation, in order to fulfil its obli- gations. If the present efforts do not succeed-if.South Africa refuses to co-operate in reaching an ultimate solution-then sooner or later, we will be forced into a situation where the United Nations collectively, as well as its Member States individually, will have to review the situation and take the measures which, in accord- ance with the Charter, depend on decisions of the Security Council, in order to.protect the basic prin- ciples on which the Organization was founded.

Mr. Mashinoaidze ZWE

Zimbabwe #6539

Some four months ago, many ofus here entertained the hope that, by the close of the current session, the question of Namibia would be deleted .fro~ the agendas of sub- t<:> be identified. 91. The Assembly must be concerned, because in its efforts to change or halt the march of history in Na- mibia, the Pretoria Government is prepared to sacrifice thousands of lives within its own borders and in the independent neighbouring countries of Angola, Mozambique, Lesotho, Botswana, Zambia and Zim- babwe, and even as far away as Seychelles. The recent cold-blooded massacre of refugees and innocent women and children, citizens of the Kingdom of Lesotho, by the regilIle's army is a painful reminder that the irrational and immoral white minority gang in Pretoria will, and can, adopt any conceivable criminal method in the pursuit of its iniquitous objectives and interests. 92. Another source of worry is the fact that the desperate Pretoria Government is prepared to sacrifice peace and security in the southern African region in its determination to frustrate and obstruct progress towards Namibia's independence. Thus, the regime is currently executing a campaign of political destabilization and economic blackmail, bullying and sabotage in the region. Pretoria thinks-it is wishful thinking-that such acts ofaggression and intimidation -will weaken the resolve and determination of the Governments and peoples of the affected countries to support the legitimate struggle for self-determination in Namibia, and for social and political justice in apartheid South Africa itself. In this, however, the regime is terribly, terribly wrong. 93. If the Pretoria Government has committed gross miscalculations in judging and assessing the responses of independent neighbouring States to its destabili- zation policy in our region, it seems confident that - certain Member States of the General Assembly 102. There was, therefore, every reason to believe that this problem-which in fact amounts to depriving a people of its right to national independence and self- determination, as well as the occupation of a territory by military force-would, thanks to the United Nations, finally find a solution in authentic indepen- dence. However, in defiance of the international con- sensus, the Pretoria regime has maintained its illegal presence in Namibia and has been mobilizing its politi- cal and military machine to impose a neo-colonialist solution on Namibia. 103. Although the intransigence and rnanreuvres of South Africa were foreseeable because they fall squarely within the logic of the apartheid system, the international community nevertheless expected from those who had solemnly undertaken, in return for 104. Though tile impression is created of per- severance in efforts to bring about a peaceful negoti- ated settlement, this situation actually reflects the tra- ditional attitude of certain r.ountries which, in order to preserve their immediate interests, are helping make even more burdensome the problems of the oppressed peoples. This ambiguity in fact reflects the duplicity which, in spite of verbal condemnation of the South African policies and their manifestations, actually makes it possible to maintain and strengthen a very dense network of relationships which in the final analysis is a comfort to South Africa in as defiance and directly or indirectly strengthens its potential aggres- sion and domination, thus inevitably dooming to dead- lock the various attempts at settlement. 105. South Africa, universally condemned for its system of apartheid, for its illegal occupation of Na- mibia ani for being a constant source of aggression agaim;t the sovereign States of southern Africa, is in effect, with the {;omplicity of certain Western Powers, attempting to break out of its isolation. Within this context, we have for some time now noted with concern statements by W~stern leaders who represent South Africa as a "special partner". This recognition ofthe particular nature ofthe links established with the Pretoria regime has been accompanied by· increased assistance to that regime. Thus recently, thanks to its allies, South Africa was able to obtain from IMF a loan of more than $1 billion, which will essentially be used to finance the strengthening of the illegal occupation of Namibia, the repression of its people and the murderous operations conducted against the inde- pendent African countries of the region. :a6. The international community, which sanctioned the ;nitiative of the five Western Powers in the hope of seeing a peaceful settlement of the question of Namibia, is thus today entitled to wonder whether they really intend to honour the commitment they freely en- tered into with the United Nations. 107. If, four years after its adoption by the Security Council, resolution 435 (1978) has not even begun to be put into effect, the reason is undeniably that those same Powers are politically not ready to exert the necessary pressure on South Africa. 108. Furthermore, today we are seeing a reversal of roles. South Africa~ which is running out of pretexts, has been offered another argument as fallacious as those that preceded it, aimed at strengthening its illegal presence in Namibia. Thus, out ofapparent concern for a negotiated peaceful solution, an attempt is being made to link the process of decolonization of Namibia with other 'questions that are exclusively within the province of the sovereignty of independent countries, Members of the United Nations. That state of affairs only strengthens the temptation of the racist regime of Pretoria to bring about an "internal" solution in Namibia. HO. In the face of Snuth Africa's procrastinations and the stepping up of its policy of oppression and aggression, the important thing is for the United Nations to express its solidarity with the struggle ofthe peoples of southern Africa by taking concrete action and measures. 111. Because the United Nations is entrusted with exclusive responsibility for conducting the process of Namibia's decolonization, because it alone pos- sesses the legal authority over that Territory until it becomes independent, and because the United Nations is responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, the United Nations must clearly honour its commitments and tak~ the decisions called for under Chapter VII of the Charter. 112. Africa, which has always appealed for the faith- ful application ofthe United Nations plan in its totality, condemns and rejects firmly the most recent attempts to link the independence of Namibia with other ques- tions which fall within the exclusive sovereignty of indep~ndent countries. Such attempts can only delay the process of decolonization in Namibia, prolong the illegal occupation of that country and strengthen the oppression of its people. 113. Today, Africa expects that the United Nations, which has undertaken to guarantee the Namibhm people the exercise of its inalienable right to self- determination and independence, willfrom now on take a more active part in achieving this goal and, con- sequently, in discharging the primary responsibility which it has never legally surrendered. 114. In this context, permit me to conclude by paying a tribute to the United Nations Council for Namibia for its outstanding efforts tirelessly made to promote the cause of the Namibian people, thus preserving the image of the United Nations before world public opinion which is our judge.

Mr. Subramaniam MYS

Malaysia #6540

For almost two decades, much of the attention of the United Nations has focused on the question of Namibia, and we do not need to be reminded as to why we are still confronted with this unresolved problem today. The recent promise of a breakthrough in the negotiations for the independence of Namibia remains, sadly, an empty one. This is not due to inaction on the part of . the United Nations, which has exerted concentrated and painstaking efforts to resolve the problem and implement the granting of the fundamental rights of self-determination and independence to the Namibian people. It is due to the complete defiance and deceptive tactics of South Africa, which, with the aid of certain friends, has been able to continue to act in contempt of resolutions of the General Assembly, the Security Council and various related organizations in the United Nations system. Malaysia is convinced that today South Africa continues to demonstrate that it has no 121. Recent as well as past negotiations on the inde- pendence of Namibia have time and again floundered, because of lack of good faith on the part of South Africa. We have painfully witnessed Pretoria's endless attempts to stall any prospect ofsettlement ofthe prob- lem. South Africa's policy of linking Namibia's inde- pendence with the withdrawal of Cuban tt:oops from Angola, for instance, is a case in point. As long as South Africa continues its procrastinating tactics and its policy of increased suppression, terrorism, military buildup, intimidation and subversion in Namibia and neighbouring States, the resolution of this long-out- standing problem will continue to be elusive. 122. Malaysia wishes, once again, to place on record its appredation of the efforts of the United Nations Council for Namibia to develop world opinion against South Africa in the light ofSouth Africa's intransigence and continued defiance of United Nations resolutions. There is need for even greater efforts to mobilize public opinion concerning lhe illegality of the occupation of NamibIa by South Africa and concerning the true nature of the independence movement and obstacles faced by the Namibian people and their sole and recog- nized representative, SWAPO. Malaysia wishes to commend the; efforts of the United Nations Council for Namibia and otherbodies w;~hin the United Nations system in bringing about a greater public awareness of the situation in Namibia and an end to South Africa's illegal control over the Territory. 123. Malaysia wishes to reaffirm, once again, its strong support for the people of Namibia and for SWAPO in their just struggle to achieve self-deter- mination, freedom and independence and to r~store peace and stability to that brutally oppressed Territory and to the region. We also wish to reiterate our firm conviction that Security Council resolution 435 (1978) should remain the basis for the peaceful implemen- tation ofthe United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia. We call upon South Africa and others in- volved once again to heed the will of the international community, expressed through the United Nations and other international forums, to seek a just and lasting solution to the problem.

Mr. KOR Bun Heng KHM

Cambodia #6541

I wish to associate my- self with previous speakers in expressing the deep sympathy of my delegation to the delegation of the Yemen Arab Republic and I wish to ask it to convey our heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims of the earthquake. 127. At this year-end, when the people and par- ticularly the children of the world are preparing for a joyous celebration of the New Year, there are people and particularly children who continue to suffer the anguish caused by foreign domination and occupation, whether in Kampuchea and Afghanistan in Asia, in the Middle East or in Africa. As far 2S Africa is concerned, the question of Namibia is still being discussed by the General Assembly, as it has been for many years. 128. The General Assembly had had the question of Namibia before it for almost 36 years, and in 1966 -some 16 years ago-by resolution 2145 (XXVI), it terminatf.d South Africa's mandate over Namibia and plac~d the Territory under the direct responsibili~y of the United Nations, in order to enable the people of Namibia fully to exercise its right to self-determination and to achieve genuine national independence. Sin~e that time, the United Nations has adopted many resolutions, in particular Security Council resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (1978), which established the frame- work for the independence ofNamibia, better known as the United Nations plan for Namibia. 129. However, the racist regime of Pretoria, with total disregard for the legitimate aspirations of the Namibian people and for the unanimous wi2l of the international community, as repeatedly expressed, has refused to co-operate in implementing that plan and has thus prolonged the sufferings and subjugation of the Namibian· people. 130. The past year has once again seen the obstinate refusal of South Africa to listen to reason. This means that a year has gone by without a resolution of the question of Namibia, which is under the direct respon- sibility of the United Nations, and without bringing closer the hope of a settlement. This means that the people of Namibia has for one more year been the vic- tim ofdomination and oppression and is going to suffer the same tragic fate in the years to come, as long as th~ authorities of South Africa continue to occupy Na- mibiaillegally. Born ofthe policy ofapartheid and colo- nial expansionism of the Pretoria regime, this situation continues to rob a whole race and a whole continent, Africa, ofhonour and dignity and to outrage the human conscience. It is therefore essential to put an end to this state of affairs, both for the dignity of Africa and for the United Nations itself. In this instance, the Organ- ization. through the United Nations Council for Na~ 138. My delegation also wishes to affirm its staunch solidarity with the otherfront-line peoples and States of Africa, which are confronting the last bastion of colo- nialism and racism in Africa, the Pretoria regime. 139. Every hour, every day, every month and every year that passes represents for the people of Namibia, as for any other people under foreign domination and occupation, one more hour, one more day, one more month and one more year of suffering and bereavement. 140. The United Nations, and in particular the Secu- rity Council, must fulfil its responsibilities and take all the measures necessary to end the illegal occupation of Namibia by the racist regime of South Africa and en- sure that the Namibian people can, without further delay, enjoy their sacred rights to self-determination, freedom and national independenc~, like other peoples, of the world. Only a settiement in accordance with resolution 435 (1978) will make it possible to achieve this objective and remove a hotbed of tens~on from Africa and the world. 141: The PRESIDENT: The next speaker is the Observer for the Palestine Liberation Organization. I call on him in accordance with General Assemblv resolution 3237 (XXIX), of 22 November 1974. - 142. Mr. HUSSAINI (Palestim. Liberation Orga- nization): Freedom is a sacred human right. All human beings are born free. NQ human being is born a slave. And nations have fought bitterly to preserve their freedom. 143. In the words of ajust Arab caliph: "Since when have you enslaved human beings born free by their mothers?" 144. Yet, today, millions of human beings are still ens~~ved, shackled by the chains ofracism, segregation and oppressive military rule. The black people of Na- mibia and the Arab people of Palestine suffer today from the oppressive chains of apartheid, racism, zionism and military occupation and domination. They stand today proud but bleeding peoples, their men tortured and massacred, their children starved and wounded, their women widowed and destitute. 145. The peoples of occupied Namibia and occupied Palestine are united in a just struggle for freedom. Their freedom fighters have died, giVing their lives to this sacred cause offreedom. But their women remain, widowed, bloodied and dispossessed, in Namibia and in Palestine, surrounded by thousands of hungry children. . - 146. In the words of Abraham Lincoln: "The soldier has gone to rest and now, crippled, blinded:and broken, 154. The United States Government today has lost its soul. It does not feel for this black or Palestinian woman. It is busy building nuclear warheads; it has no timeJor the poor, the meek and the hungry. 155. One black American, Martin Luther King, spoke for that human soulofAmerica. Despite racism, bigotry and hatred, he stood up to say: "When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up the day 162. Our heroic people in Namibia and Palestine will defy death and will struggle to live. They do not carry hatred, bigotry or vengeance in their hearts. They, like that Palestinian fisherman from Nazareth, will repeat: NOTES I Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16. 2 Official Recordx of the General Assembly, Thirty-filth Ses- sion, Supplement No. 24, val. 1, annex 11. 3 See A/AC.I09/702, para. 6. 4 Ibid., para, 19.

The meeting rose at 1.30 p.m.