A/38/PV.76 General Assembly

Seventeen years have elapsed since the General Assembly terminated South Africa's Mandate over Namibia [see resolution 2145 (XXI)) and 12 years since the historical advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 21 June 1971. 1 It is therefore a matter of great concern that South Africa con- tinues its illegal occupation of Namibia in disregard of the wishes of the international community expressed in vari- ous resolutions of the General Assembly and of the Secu- rity Council. My delegation reiterates its full support for the struggle of the Namibian people for self~determination and independence in a united Namibia in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial <;ountries ~q Peoples [resolution 1514 (XJI)), the DeclaratIon on PrInciples of International Law con- ~erning Friendly ~elations and Co-operation among States In accordance WIth the Charter of the United Nations [resolution 2625 (XXV), annex) and other relevant reso- lutions and decisions of the General Assembly and of the Security Council. 2. By the terms of General Assembly resolutions 2145 (XXI) and 2248 (S-V), Namibia is the direct responsibil- ~ty of th.e United Nations. This unique responsibility IS exercised through the United Nations Council for Namibia, which is the sole legal Administering Authority for Namibia. 3. My delegation shares the deep concern of the inter- national community at the rapid depletion of the natural resources of Namibia in violation of Decree No. 1 for the Protection of the Natural Resources of Namibia,2 enacted by the United Nations Council for Namibia on 27 September 1974. This exploitation constitutes another obstacle to the immediate independence of Namibia and endangers its eventual economic independence. 4. The people of Namibia have been waging a heroic str~ggle for national independence under the leadership of theIr sole representative, the South West Africa People's Organization [SWAPO]. This struggle is being waged in the face of massive and ruthless repressions by South Africa. The extension of the abhorrent system of apart- heid to Namibia and the gross and systematic violations Wednesday, 30 November 1983, at 11 a.m. NEW YORK by the racist regime of the human rights of the Namib- ian people have been rightly condemned by the Organ- ization. SimiIarI~, the United Nations has declared illegal and null and VOId attempts by South Africa to destroy the territorial integrity of Namibia. 5. In its blatant efforts to defy the will of the inter- national community, South Africa has persisted with the policy of massive military build-up in Namibia. South Africa has resorted to compulsory military service for Namibians and recruitment and training of Namibians for tribal armies. Nepal strongly condemns the persistent acts of aggression launched from Namibian territory against neighbouring African States, and especially against Angola. Nepal supports the efforts of the southern Afri- can States to safeguard their national independence and territorial integrity and joins the demand for the imme- diate and unconditional withdrawal of South African forces from Angola. 6. The international community has given full and firm support to Security Council resolutions 435 (1978) and 439 (1978) as the only basis for a peaceful solution of the Namibian question. It might be recalled that pursuant to the call made by the Seventh Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries, held at New Delhi from 7 to 12 March 1983 [see A/38/132 and Corr.1 and2, annex, sect. I, para. 49), and by the Assem- bly of Heads of State and Government of the Organiza- tion of African Unity [OAU) at its nineteenth ordinary session, held at Adr':s Ababa from 6 to 12 June 1983 [see A/38/312, annex, l>$olution ABO/Res. 105 (XIX)), the Security Council met twice this year to consider further action to expedite the implementation of its resolution 435 (1978) endorsing the United Nations plan for the inde- pendence of Namibia. In paragraph 24 of his report sub- mitted to the Security Council ...·lfsuant to resolution 532 (1983),3 the Secretary-Genen•• observed that "we have never before been so close to finalit~ on the modalities of implementing resolution 435 (1978)". He further stated, in paragraph 25: "However, the position of South Africa regarding the issue of the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola as a pre-condition for the implementation of resolution 435 (1978) ... makes it impossible to launch the United Nations plan." 7. Some three years ago, at the Geneva pre-implemen- tation meeHng, South Africa sabotaged the implementa- tion of th~ United Nations plan by linking Namibia's independence to its charge of United NatioIls lack of impartiality in overseeing the implementation ofthe plan. Of late, South Africa has resorted to the tactics of link- ing the inalienable right of the Namibian people to self- determination and national independence to an issue which is extraneous to the issues in the United Nations plan. 8. Many world leaders spoke before the thirty-eighth [;'~ssion of the General Assembly about the imperative need to restore the prestige and authority of the United Nations. They warned that if the lawlessness and immoral- ity of States such as South Africa are allowed to paralyse world. The liberation of Namibia from the colonial oppression of the racist regime of South Africa has now come to the forefront in the struggle to eliminate colo- nialism from the face of the earth. Speaking from this rostrum, many representatives of African countries and the Secretary for Foreign Relations of SWAPO, Mr. Peter Mueshihange [72nd meeting], have spoken very convkc- ingly of the determination ofthe peoples of Africa to lead the struggle for the freedom of Namibia to complete victory. 50. More than 17 years ago, the General Assembly adopted a decision ending South Africa's Mandate over Namibia. The United Nations called on South Africa to free Namibia unconditionally and itself assumed direct responsibility for that country. The 17 years that have elapsed since the General Assembly took that decision have been a glorious epic in the heroic struggle of the people of Namibia, under the leadership of its vanguard and sole, genuine representative, SWAPO, for freedom and independence. 51. At the same time, these years have seen growing international support for the just cause of the Namibian people and they have been years during which, within and outside the United Nations, there has been growing indignation at the aggressive racist policy ofthe Pretoria regime and the protection provided to that regime by its allies. 52. Throughout these years, South Africa, relying on the direct assistance of the United States of America and some other countries members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization-but primarily the United States of America-has disregarded the numerous decisions of the NatiGns to end South African occupat,on and to ensure the accession of Namibia to genuine independence. It was also firmly emphasized that the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia remains the sole basis for a peaceful settlement of the problem of Namibia. Sup- port was also expressed for a continuation of the work of the Secretary-General in this connection and there was a call for implementation of Security Council resolu- tion 435 (1978). 70. It was unanimously considered that settlement of the Namibian problem was a vital requirement, not only for thf. Namibian people themselves but for all the peoples of southern Africa, as well as an urgent need to avert serious tension in the area and to ensure international peace and stability. 71. The need to procei;ld now with forceful and radical measures to put an end to the colonialist domination of Namibia by South Africa has been emphasized time and again by the Romanian delegation. This derives from the responsibilities directly assumed by the United Nations in the most formal manner with regard to the Namibian people, 15 years ago, and also the obligations set forth in the Charter with regard to people still under colonial domination, and also in respect of situations of tension and conflict, in orderto ensure the maintenance of inter- national peace and security. 72. Despite the outstanding achievements of the United Nations in the area of decolonization, it has not yet been possible to liberate Namibia, the last African Territory that remains in a dependent state and subjected to colo- nial occupation. The situation is all the more serious in that Namibia is the only Territory with international opinion~ stated: "(1) that, the continued presence of South Africa in Namibia being illegal, South Africa is under obliga- tion to withdraw its administration from Namibia immediately and thus put an end to its occupation of the Territory; . . . "(2) that States Members ofthe United Nations are under obligation to recognize the illegality of South Africa's presence in Namibia and the invalidity of its acts on behalf of or concerning Namibia, and to refrain from any acts and in particular any dealings with the Government of South Africa implying recognition of the legality of, or lending support or assistance to, such presence and administration; "(3) that it is incumbent upon St~tes which are not Members of the United Nations to give assistance, within the scope of subparagraph (2) above, in the action which has been taken by the United Nations with regard to Namibia." 1 by the Security Council and once by the world commu- nity at the International Conference in Support of the Struggle of the Namibian People for Independence is vivid evidence of the gravity and acuteness of the prob- lem in and around Namibia. At its current session, the General Assembly is again seized of the question of Namibia as an important problem demanding an imme- diate solution. 183. The solution of this problem at the earliest pos- sible time is a matter not only of liberating the people of Namibia, who have suffered for so long, from colonial and racist oppression, but also of alleviating tension and removing the threat to international peace and security. 184. As is well known, the world community, in par- ticular the United Nations, has spared no effort to bring freedom and independence to the sorely tried people of Namibia. If all the relevant resolutions and deci&ions of the General Assembly and the Security Council had been strictly observed and implemented by all States Members of the United Nations, Namibia would long ago have joined the family of sovereign nations. The reason why the people of Namibia remain subjected to cruel colo- nial and racial oppression lies in the double-standard policies of some Western Powers, first and foremost the United States, which in their words are against apartheid and racial discrimination but in their deeds and in every other way encourage and support the racist regime of South Africa for their own narrow politk~al, strategic and economic purposes. 185. The so-called contact group, consisting of five Western Powers-Canada, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States of America-which was supposed to help ensure the implementation of the United Nations plan for the inde- pendence of Namibia, has, on the contrary, enabled the Pretoria regime to gain time in order to adopt a series of unilateral, illegal measures aimed at the perpetuation of its colonial and racial domination of Namibia. 186. Western Powers permanent members of the Secu- rity Council which are also members of the so-called contact group have blocked the imposition of compre- hensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa, which are the only effective means of compelling South Africa Afr~ca is strengthening its military capability. Military expenditure has been increasing every year. Thus, for example, the defence budget for 1982/83 is estimated at 3 j,illion rand, representing a 7 per cent increase over the pJ eceding year. The strength of the South African force in Namibia alone is estimated at 100,000, approximately une soldier to every 12 members of the Namibian popu- lation. This intensive military build-up of South Africa has become possible through the extensive military sup- port of some Western countries which supply the racist regime with combat equipment in disregard of the arms embargo. Furthermore, the United States has already lifted existing restrictions on the supply of equipment from the United States to South Africa, thus freeing its hand for collaboration with South Africa in the military field. 190. Moreover, the Pretoria regime, again with the assistance of some Western Powers, in particular the United States and Israel, is making every effort to develop its nuclear technology with a view to acquiring nuclear- weapon capability. In view of the aggressive policy and sinister designs of the apartheid regime, the world com- munity must not allow this to happen. 191. Along with the cruel repression and military opera- tions against the people of Namibia, who, under the lead- ership of SWAPO, their sole and authentic representative, are waging an armed liberation struggle, the racist author- ities subject the indigenous people of the Territory to ruthless exploitation and plunder their natural resources. Suffice it to mention that, according to a report of the United Nations Council for Namibia entitled "Activities of foreign economic interests operating in Namibia", 11 South Africa has appropriated 60 per cent of the total land area and some 90 per cent of the best arable farm- land for the exclusive occupation and utilization of the white minority; and approximately 80 per cent of the Terricory's total mining assets are held by just three foreign corporations. 207. The racist regime of Pretoria, through its militariza- tion of Namibia, has used it as a bridgehead for bunching acts of aggression against neighbouring States, particu- larly Angola, part of the territory of which it is still occupying. In its armed attacks against these countries as in its repression against the Namibian peopl~ and the SWAPO fighters, the racist regime also uses mt.ccenaries from various other countries. This brutal repression has led to Namibian refugees fleeing to neighbouring coun- tries, thus creating additional burdens for those countries. 208. This situation in Namibia, whose people have been refused the right to self-determination, causes us to remember the situation in the Middle East, where the Arab Palestinian people have been refused the exercise of their inalienable rights, including the right to estab- lish an independent Arab State in Palestine. In both cases, the occupier and oppressor benefits from the support of that same imperialist Power, the former through a policy of so-called "constructive engagement" and the latter through "strategic co-operation" which in the last few days has teen strengthened further. Also, both enjoy immunity because they are protected by the right ofveto of their great protector. 209, The question of Namibia is a question of decolo~ nization and, as such, a direct responsibility ofthe United Nations and must be solved within the context of the United Nations, in accordance with its relevant reso- lutions. In this spirit, my delegation would like to pay NOTES 9Ibid., Thirty-eighth Year, 24815t mgeting. I08ee Report of the International Conference in Support of the Struggle ofthe Namibian Peoplefor Independence, Paris, 25-29 April 1983 (A/CONF.120/13), part three. 11 A/CONF.120/4-A/AC.131/92.