A/39/PV.79 General Assembly

The Government and people of India take considerable pride in the fact that, 39 years ago, at the very first session of the General Assembly, our delegation was among the first to raise the question of Namibia, then known as South West Africa, in this forum. The question of 'Namibia thus belongs to that category of issues of overriding importance that, in this forum, are as old as the United Nations itself. India's interest and active involvement in promoting the Namibian cause are equally rooted in history. 2. However, what we do not consnder a matter of pride-indeed, none of us in the Assembly could consider a matter ofpride-is the continued inability of the United Nations to put an end to the terrible ordeal of the Namibian people in spite ofthe nearly four decades of endeavour towards that objective. The delay in bringing about the independence of Namibia is all the more unconscionable in the light _e .....- l'__.. ..1.._.. 1:' 1•• 6 •••_ _ I:' ..1._ft_ l"_..._ "IA..ftftAa.n VI UI'iOi &Cl'" ulCn IVI U'iOiQII'y ,",V VI UIV"'iOi IVUI U'iOi"au'iOi" Namibia has been a direct and unique responsibility of the United Nations. For over six years now, a universally endorsed settlement plan for Namibia, adopted by the Security Council with much hope at that tIme, has remained a dead letter. The failure of the United Nations to give effect to its own resolu- tions and decisions on the question of Namibia constitutes the biggest blot on the otherwise com- mendable record of the Organization in the field of decolonization and has, indeed, cast a shadow on its very credibility. 3. Why is it that, in spite of years of concerted international effort aimed at liberating Namibia from the colonial yoke, we should have to countenance the frustration of having to witness-or rather, dep- lore-the completion of a century of colonialism ID that country this year? NEW YORK 4. Our tl.:'ute to the valiant people of Namibia on the occasion of one hundred years of struggle cannot but be tinged with a sense of disappointment, even a feeling of shame, that Namibia's ordeal should have been allowed to last so long. How is it, we must once again ask, that the sustained and unanimous demand ofthe international community for the independence of Namibia is rebuffed repeatedly and persistently? Why does the United Nations find itself.-and why do we, the vast majority of the international commu- nity, find ourselves-so impotent in the face of such arrogant defiance of resolutions and decisions of the Assembly and of the Security Council, of the adviso- ry opinion of the International Court of Justice and of the universal will? 5. The reasons are not far to seek. They lie first and foremost in the very nature of the racist regime of Pretoria, which has habitually treated with scorn and contempt the will of the international community in remorselessly pursuing the obnoxious policy ofapart- heid within South Africa, ~ontinuing its illegal occu- pation of Namibia and repeatedly indulging in wanton acts of aggression and destabilization direct- ed against independent African States. We all real- ized long ago that the Pretoria regime did not subscribe to recognized norms of State conduct and that moral suasion could have no impact on)t. 6. The reasons for South Africa's intransigence must lie also in the support, overt and tacity,that the racist regime has received from its powerful friends and allies. Through political and diplomatic support and continued co-operation with SOulh Africa in various fields of activity, certain Govetnments have helped to shield South Africa from i international pressure and, indeed, served to create'a situation in which South Africa has felt encouraged to pursue defiantly its reprehensible policies. Indeed, the hiatus between the professed commitment of those coun- tries to bringing about the independence of Namibia, on the one hand. and their a~tm:~l deeds~ on the otber~ has proved to be a crucial impediment to the international effort to isolate and put pressure upon South Africa. 7. I need hardly dilate on the position of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries on the ques- tion ofNamibia, which has been firm, consistent and unequivocal. That position was reiterated most re- cently at the Meeting of Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Heads of Delegation of the Non-Aligned Coun- tries to the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly, held in New York from 1 to 5 October 1984. The non-aligned countries have always sutl- ported the inalienable right of the people of Nam.ibla to self-determination and independence in a united Namibia. We believe that the Namibian people are fully justified in carrying on their struggle by every means at their disposal, including armed struggle. We t1<?n~ Trammg C.entre for N:amlbla where 200 N!l- the Council in its report [see A/39/24, part four]. mlblan ref'!gees, m tpe provmce of Kwanza.Sui, m 46. Mr. HERRERA CACERES (Honduras) (inter- the. Peopl~ s .Republlc <?f Angola, .are carrymg out pretation from Spanish): One of the items which has baSIC stu~les 1!1 automobtle mechamcs, ~arpentry ~lDct been given the greatest attention in the General ~ther b~slc skills necessal'f. (or the effiCient function- Assembly is the question of Namibia. The Assembly mg of IDd~pendent ~amlbla.. and a number of subsidiary ~odies have consid.ered 37.. I.n ~hls. connection, we are com~ltted to .and the evolution of the situation of that Territory part!clpai.e m th~ .work of. the Umted Nations starting from the establishment of the mandate, Institute for Namibia, based m Lusaka, where ~r~_ which was revoked by the General Assembly on 27 mibians are also preparing for the future task of October 1966 at which time the United Nations leading their country. . assumed dire~t responsibility for the Territory and 38. Never before has the United Nations had such a the people of Namibia. In 1967, the General Assem- clear understanding of its responsibilities. In a diffi- bly esta"lished as a subsidiary body the United cult and tragic situation it is doing everything in its Nations Council for Namibia, to which it gave the power to give to persons living in their own territory, role of le,al Administering Authority of that Territo- unlawfully occupied by others, the assurance that ry until mdependence. they do not stand alone and that the international 47. Since the General Assembly does not have the coml1!unity understands th~ need t'? establish ~n necessary powers to ensure the withdrawal of the effective degree ofco-operation. The nght of Namlb- foreign administration, it decided to bring the matter ia to freedom is being recognized not only with words to the Security Council. Thus, in resolutions dating but also with deeds. as long a,o as 1969, the Security Council recognized 39. I am convinced that history will record this as the temllnation of the mandate and requested the one of the most meritorious undertakings of the Government ofSouth Africa to withdraw Immediate- United Nations: the creation of a world free from its ly from that Territory. ••,ft~f> AftA....... :AC! Mat" .o'V""'PAC!£! Rn title! .t'V"1'!!I.C!inn tn th,:a AO ......L_ T_.. ..: I 1""'-....... "",1' 'I""ft+~"'4 "'no ........... ""a"" ..,••..,••••..,g. 'Y&U3 & "'AI'.",,,g v••••••" ~"WJ''''V'•••'" "••W' 61'0. 1.11f; Ill"~I.IA"IUIJCI1 '"'"'VU.. " VI. "U~"I.""'" &I.g~ VI. rresident of th~ United Nati~ns C~uncil f~r Namib- repeated occasions examin.e4 the international status la-today PreSident ofthe thlrty-nmth s~sslon of t~e of the Territory of Namibia and the legal conse- General Assembly-Mr. Paul Lusaka, our deep satls- quences deriving therefrom. That principal United faction at the work he has done for the goals that Nations organ has recognized since 1950 the compe- speak so highly of international solidarity. tence of the General Assembly as regards that status 40. It is clear that the more intensified the steps and, as is well known, in 1971 issued an advisory taken and the greater the understanding of the opinion3 stating both the obligation of South Africa problem, officially and individually, the more the to put an end to its unlawful presence by withdrawing pressure on the South African regime will become its administration from the Territory ofNamibia and unbearable. Deseite the disappointments and set- of States Members of the United Nati<?ns to recog- backs, the credibility ofthe United Nations, through nize the illegality of South Africa's presence. its direct intervention in the question of Namibia, is 49. Those obligations entail the duty not to estab- still at an acceptable level. lish conven~ional relations in those cases in which the 41. In the Council's daily work we have benefitted Government of South Africa would presume to act from the constructive criticism and sugestions of on behalfof Namibia or in tes~ct Ofthat Territory; Comrade Toivo 18 Toivo on the Councifs activities~ not to accredit in South Africa diplomatic or consul- Thus, in the Council we supported the idea that the ar missions the jurisdiction.ofwhich might extend to Council should·· eontin. &0 work with a view to Namibia and' aot toiell.d' con$u1ar agents t~ that ensu.rin.l . bet.. te,r. p r g t . . . '. eet,ioII: fOf· Ne . ·. m~.. ft~.~raI,: T..•ffitOtY .. '... ;. lOtto . :.,1 , m,.~nta'd. re.la. tio~s whi,!h. might resources, the ..,.or, ~ ~ of~;~'$t~IMI. ~!~t:"'~$. autl1011ty In Namibia; and ~eterminat~on and true independence of the Namib- 58. In this connection, we should give full support lan people In the face of ~xternalpressure or attempts to the efforts of the Secretary-General and, as he a~ externa.1 press~re, whl~h come or may come from requested, we must agree that the question ofNamib- different Ideological hOflzons. ia should be considered as a priority question in its 51. Thus, in 1978, the Security Council adopted a own right and that Security Council resolution 435 resolution laying down the modalities for free elec- (1978) continues to be the sole basis for a solution. tions which, under the supervision and control of the We should also reaffirm that all agreements and United Nations, would guarantee the expression of arrangements arrived at to date by the United all trends of thought among the Namibian popula- Nations remain valid and in force. Therefore, we tion, so as to ensure true free determination, while must give full support and co-operation to the creating a democratic, pluralistic and united society. Secretary-General so that he may pursue and intensi- 52. Honduras is taking part in this debate in order fy hi.s .efforts tl? achieve a rapid solution to the to say that we are aware of the duties incumbent Namlblan question. upon all States Members of the United Nations 59. Honduras reiterates its conviction that we deriving from the responsibilities that the United should not establish any link 0" parallelism between Nations has assumed vis-a-vis the people and Territo- the independence of Namibia and matters that are ry of Namibia. extraneous to that question and which were not taken 53. Honduras has repeatedly expressed its views on into account. when the United Nations plan for this situ&tion. During the general debate, on 9 Nami~ia was adopted. Nothing should be allowed to October, our Minister for Foreign Affairs reiterated delay mdependence. those views before the Assembly when he said: 60. However, as we have stated on other occasions, "Honduras rejects the presence of foreign troops Honduras cannot disregard the fact that there are in Namibia and deplores the delay in establishing elements of insecurity and tension in the southern an independent, sovereign State. The United Na- part of Africa and that those conflicts must be tions plan for the independence of Namibia is the resolved peacefully for the benefit of the peace and basis for a lasting, peaceful solution." [26th meet- security to which all States without exception in that ing, para. 227.] part of the world. art! entitled. This wo~ld also 54. Eighteen years have elapsed since the General promote the cl?n~ohda~lon of the expect~4 mdepen- Assembly terminated South Africa's Mandate over dence of Namibia, .whlch, let me s~y' agam, s~ould South West Africa, subsequently proclaimed and not be ~elayed or hm~ered ~y condlt.lOlls rel~tm~ to known as Namibia, and six years have elapsed since the achievement of t~IS ultllI~ate regional obJective. the United Nations plan to ensure peaceful transition We there~ore agretp With the views ~f other Memb~rs towards independence for the Namibian people was of the Umted Nat~ons,. suc~ as, for mstance, Aus~na, adopted whose representative, m hiS statement at the thirty- . . eighth session, on 29 November 1983, said: 55. Honduras supported the resolutions of the «c c • c cc. c c' cc. .c ....... c Security Council arid the General Assembly aimed at --su~n element~ .snoulo not De llnK~O .to me UDueo concluding as soon as possible all the arrangements Nations tra~sltIon pla!l fOl Na~ll1bla bpt should relating to the implementation of the United Nations rather be dlsc~ssed dIrectly With the mterested plan for the independence of Namibia and the qovernments m an overall effort t~ r~duce ten- peaceful settlement ofthe question on the basis ofthe slons and to put an ~nd to.the conflict. In the area immediate implementation of those resolutions, thus as a whole, perha~s 11~clu4mg appropriate guaran- avoiding any attempt to hamper the process that tees for !~e terntonal. mtegnty of the States would lead to that end. concerned. [75th meetzng, para. 173.] 56. But what has happened to date? Despite the 61. The intern~ti~nal reality shows that those con- pronouncements of the organs I have referred to tacts and negotiatIOns are already under way. concerning the international status of the Territory 62. The search for a peaceful solution to the and the illegality of the presence of South Africa, in Namibian question must be accelerated, given the spite of the fact that there is a United Nations 1.lan, justified impatience of the Namibian people. That is accepted by the Republic of South Africa itsel, for why we emphasize that it is desirable to give the the peaceful transition to independence of Namibia, Secretary-General the greatest possible support in his in spite of the fact that the General Assembly and the actions aimed at achieving a peaceful settlement on Security Council continue to adopt resolutions which the basis of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). express the concern of the international community The Contact Group can co-operate in expediting the at the continued unlawful occupation ofthe Territory attainment ofa solution to the contlictzwhich derives of Namibia, in spite of all the foregoing, the occupy- from the foreign occupation of Namlbian territory. peopl~should contiuue to en~ure ma?tlmum self- 69. The key to the settlement of t~e Namibi~n sufficlen~y.. S~pport .for th~ Y~llted Nations Councd question lies in te.rminating South AfrIcan ~olomal for NamibIa In all ItS actIvIties, as well as for.the rule so that the Namibian people may enJoy the Uni~ed Nati,?ns Fund for ~~mibia and the Umted inalienable right to self-determination a~d indepe~- Nations InstItute for Namibia, should be st~ength- dence which they ought to enjoy. SecurIty CouncIl ened: All co-oper~ti~n .with the State oc~upymg the resolution 435 (1978) adheres to those principles Territory of.Namlbla. m .the way of asslst~nc~ that while taking into account the many aspects of the would he~p It to malp.tam or strengthen Its Illegal realities both within and outside ,Namibia. In the presence m that Territory should ceas~. . course ofnegotiations, SWAPO, which represents the 65. To this end, conferences, symposia and seml- Namibian people, has over the years always taken a nars should be held in different regions of the world reasonable and constructive approach, demonstrat- in order to bring to the,attention of public opinion in ing patience and flexibility to the greatest extent. But all continents the duty of the international commu- the South African authonties have stubbo~ly stuc.k nity to ensure the rapid accession to indePt:nde!1ce of to their colonialist position, constantly varymg.their Namibia through the genui!1e sel~-determ.matlon of tricks and resorting to both hard a~d s~ft tactics to its people by means of free, Impartial electIons under delay the settlement of the question m order to the supervi~ion and control of the United Nations. protect their own strategic and economic intere~ts ~n 66. It is to be hoped that the solut~on. to ~he Namibia ~nd .preserve the system of aparthezd m problem of Namibia will, at the latest, comclde With South Africa Itself. the commemoration ofthe fortieth anniversary ofthe 70 Intensifying their military repression, they have United Nations. ~t us remembe~ that by 1985, recently forced all males between the ages. of 17 and almost 40 years wr.ll have elapsed smce we began to 55 to serve with the South African occupation troops. deal with t~e question of N~mi.bia. We.must there- In order to strengthen thei~ political rule, they have fore regard It as one ofour pnorlty .quesb~ns, an~ we fostered puppet representatives and refused to rec~g- must strengthen our efforts to brmg thiS question, nize SWAPO the sole and authentic representative and our direct responsibility with regard to it, to.a of the Namibian people, as acknowledged by the conclusion, thus providing yet fU!'1her pr,?of t~a~, In United Nations. They are attempting to stee,r cle.ar of the words of the Charter, the Untted NatIons IS m.a the United Nations under the cover of a 'regional position "to bring about by peaceful. means,. and m settlement" and to proceed with their own plans. c~niormity wi~h the principies oijustIce.and lfii~tfia- 71 Moreover, havi-ng stalled for a long time, they tl~nallaw, a~Just.ment o~ settl~ment of mternatumal stiil refuse to withdraw their troops from ! ngola, disputes 0;' situations which might lead to a breach of following their invasion, and insist on linking .the the peace . . .. . independence of Namibia with Cuban troop w~th- 67.. Mr. ~ING Qmg. (C~ma) (z1}terpretatlOn from drawal from Angola and making the impleme~t~tlon Chznese): Smce the begm~mgofthis year, two rounds ofSecurity Council resolution 435 (1978) CO~dl~10nal oftalks. have been held, m Lusaka and. Cape Ver~e, on this troop withdrawal. Boasting that theirs IS the respec~iyely, between the S~uth Afncan colomal only powerful military force in southern Africa~ they a~t~ontles and SWAPO, .whlc~ represents the Na- have wantonly subjected neighbouring countnes to n;l1bla~people. However, owmg ~o the lac~. of their invasion and threats. These arbitrary acts ~f smcenty on the part ofthe South Afncan ~uthorltles, regional he~emonism perpetrated by tne South Afrl- these talks have produce;:d no results, With no pro- can authonties have not only met with rejection by p-ess made .whatsoeve~ 1.n the process towards the SWAPO qnd the African front-line Stat~s, ~ut ~lso mdel?e~dence of Nam~bla. NO\y, n'?t only do thef have aroused the bitter resentment and mdlgnatlon Namlblan p~ople contl!1ue to hv~ !n an abyss 0 of the international community. misery under South Afnca's colomahst rule, but the 'b' I h sovereignty of the already independent countries in 72. The struggle of the Naml lan pe~ e as re- southern Africa has been subjected to repeated ceived,extensive sympat~y and support rom al~ti~ encroachments and the situation in, the region as a countries and peoples m th~ world thaFt ;Up l~ whole remains' unsettled. Facts show tliat the root j1l;stice. At the Summit ~eetmg of.the ront- Ipe cause of tension in southern Africa Iieltin the SOl/th States held at Arusha, DOtted RePUbItC.: nat~onal held. a meetIng at Arusha. The twentieth from Arabic): At its thirty-ninth session the General ordInary session of the Assembly, of.Heads of ~tate Assembly is considering items and questions discuss- an4 Government.of the OrgamzatlOn of Afncan ed at many previous sessions. What is really striking Umty, held a~ Addis Ab~ba from 12 to.15 Nov~mber, is that very few such problems have been solved and the Meetmg ~f Mlmsters for F~relgn Affalr~ and effectively; others have become a permanent feature Heads.of De~egahon C?fthe Non-Ahgned Countnes to of the agenda of the General Assembly since the the t~trty-mnth s~sslOn of the General Assembly, founding of the United Nations. held In New York from 1 to 5 October, both . reiterated that Security Council resolution 435 78. Yesterday. [77th meetmg], the general Assem- (1978) is the basis for the settlement ofthe Namibian b~y c~ncl~ded Its ~ebate on agenda .tte:m 36, .on ~he question, expressed opposition to linkage ofany kind situatIOn .In the Mld41e. East; t<?day !t IS consl~en~g and voiced resolute support for the just struggle of the .qu,estton ~f Na~ubla; and m a ~ew days, It ~Ill the Namibian people. In the past year, the United begm ItS conSideratIOn of the queshon of Palestme. Nations Council for Namibia, under your dynamic 79. These three questions share a common factor: guidance, Mr. President, has made new efforts for the the existence of foreign occupation. As in Palestine cause of the liberation of the Namibian people. and the Middle East, there is in Namibia an obnox- 73. It should be pointed out that the intransigence ious foreign occupatiop. Anoth~r common factor. in ofthe South African authorities is inseparable from a these t~ree queshon~ IS the claim by the cccu~ymg big Power's policy of "constructive engagement" authonty to o~nershlp C?f some or all of the ter~tory towards South Africa and its insistence on a settle- under. occupatIOn a~d ItS attempts to a!lnex It. In ment that links Cuban troop withdrawal from Angola P~lestIne an~ the Mlddl~ East, ~srael cla~ms own~r- with the independence of Namibia. We hold that it ship of certam lands, as It ColO1:uzes. and Imp~ses I~S should abandon the practice that inflates the arm- laws .0!1 others. T~e sa~e thmg IS ~appenmg m gance of South Africa and runs counter to the Namibia;. South Afnca claims ownership of parts of aspirations of the vast majority of African countries that Ternt~ry. Yet ~mother commo~ facto~ m th~se and the international community as a whole, so that q!les~lo~s IS the eXistence of.a racist pohcy whlc.h it may discharge its responsibilities in strict obser- dlscnmma!e~ between ~opulahon ~roups o~ the baSIS vance of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). ~frace, religion <?r colo~r. Ju~t a~ I~ Pa!estme, \,Ve se:e 7 . . m southern Afnca racial dlscnmmatlon, which IS ~. Namibia covers an area o~ over 820,000 square condemned by the entire world. It is no wonder, kl!o~etres ~nd has a po~u!ahon of ~ore than a therefore, that zionism has been declared a fOfl\l of mtlhon. ~ubJect~d to colomahst oppressIOn for over a racism and South Africa's policy of aparth~id has cen!ury, It ~em~n,!s today 1;1nder the rule of the South been characterized as another form of racism. African n~cI~t reg~me and IS the largest colony lefto n , " , . earth. ThiS IS a disgrace to the human society of the 80. T~ese are but three ~xamples of.,the hn~s 1980s. We wish to call on all States Members of the connectmg the three questIOns, beca~se th~re IS United Nations strictly to implement Security Coun- another commo1,l feature-namely, the mtranslg~nce cil resolution 435 (1978) in the interest of the early an~ arroganc~ displayed by t~e forces ~f occupatIOn. achievement of the independence of Namibia, to ThiS f~ature IS demonst~ated m.t~e Middle East ~nd carry out the Security Council resolution on an arms Palestme bf Israel and m ~amlbla ~y Sou~h ~frlca. embargo against South Africa and to obserVe Decree Both occupl~rsare f~ced with categoflc~l reJection by No. 1 for the Protection of the Natural Resources of the J?opulabons, which. express .that reJ~ctlon by all Namibia,2 enacted by the United Nations Council for pOSSible means recogmzed by mternatlOnal law. Namihi.::l A~ rpo~rtiQ th ~nl1th A f'..il'~n ~..thn"'ti.,." RI n........... i", ftAn.ft........h .......lI" ........... ..... ........... ....(;' .h~ - ..--------- • - --c--_ ,.., --- ""' "' "".,;" va. "aa.Ma••" f:t""""6&u,II&J.&"",U,&&l ••~U& ..v }lG""i3 U. "I."''' who refuse to abide by the relevant Security Council African continent and, historically, has had excellent resolutions, sanctions should be taken a~amst them relations with that continent. ThiS for us is a source in accordance with the relevant provisions of the of pride and honour, but above all it is the reason for Charter of the United Nations. our extreme interest in the affairs of that continent. 75. I wish to reiterate here that the Chinese Gov- The: Sultanat~ of Oman. shares the aspirations of ~he ernment and people vehemently condemn the racist Afrlc!lD contment and ItS hopes for.Just and lastmg authorities of South Africa for their illegal occupa- solutions to the problema that beset.tt. The S~ltanate tion of Namibia, strongly support the Namibian of Oman als~ f~lly ~hares the. contment's g~lef ~nd people's independence struggle in all its forms, sorrow ~t Afflc~ ~ phght r~sultmg.from 4eterloratmg mcluding armed struggle and will continue to render economiC conditions, which deflve m~mly from a moral, political and mat~rial support and assistance number of natural factors beyond Affl~a's co~t~ol. to SWAPO. We firmly support the countries of T~e.tragedyo~the refugees and the famm~ affilctmg southern Africa in their struggle to defend their I1'!tlhons ofAfr!cans ar~ but two m.amfestab~ns ofthe sovereignty, independence and territorial integdty. difficult Situation facmg the Afflcan contment. We resolutely support the people of South Africa In 82. My country reaffirms its solidarity with the their just struggle a~ainst the system ofapartheid and peoples ofthe Mrican continent and its hope that the for basic human fightS and racial equality, and we African countries will occupy a better place in the shall continue to provide whatever assistance lies constellation of nations. It is therefore no wonder within our power. that my country shows great interest in the question on~y to the prolongation of the suffering of the withhold the acquisition by South Africa of sophisti- Namibian people and to more bloodshed and, more- cated technology in the nuclear field which might over, are a danger to international peace and security enable it to become a nuclear Power, not only in the African continent but in the world at 97. We are looking forward to the day when the large. people of Namibia will be abl~ to exercise fully their 90. It is high time to put an end to the continued right to self-determination and independence. We illegal occupation by South Africa ofNamibia and to hope that that day is near. We are confident that the its awession against the Namibian people and its roles the United Nations, through the United Na- expiOltation of Namibia's natural resources. tions Council for Namibia under the direction of Mr. 91. The international community should assume its Lusaka, and the Secretary-General can play, in responsibilities clearly and unequivocally. Namibia accordance with the relevant resolutions, will enable must attain its full mdependence without anv in- the people of Namibia to achieve their aspirations to fringement of its territorial integrity, which inciudes independence and freedom. Walvis Bay and the offshore islands. The internation- 98. Mr. MINIKON (Liberia): As the United Na- al community should cate,orically reject the South tions approaches the fortieth anniversary of its African claims to ownership of that gulf and those founding, my delegation believes that a high point of islands, pursuant to the various resolutions adopted its celebration and a timely tribute would be to have by the General Assembly which have affirmed that Namibia, represented by Namibians, rightly seated Walvis Bay and the offshore islands are integral to among the ranks of States Members of the United Namibia and that any measure taken by South Africa Nations. Regrettably, it would be unwise, in view of to separate those areas from Namibia is null and negative signals, to entertain any such false hopes or void. idle speculations that that will be the case. However, 92. The international community has the direct Liberia remains cautiously optimistic that good responsibility of preserving the resources of Namibia reasoning, moral courage, political will and justice and putting an end to the plundering of them. The will eventually prevail in the fulfilment of the resources of the Territory are the rightful property of inalienable rights of the people of Namibia. the people of Namibia. The United Nations, which 99. In reflecting upon the accomplishments of the has assumed the responsibility of administering the United Nations, my dele~ation would like to observe Territory, is duty bound to preserve that right so that that, to date, the questIOn of Namibia cannot be the Namibian people will be able to put these listed in the annals as having even come near to rewurces to good use after its independence is making meaningful progress towards self-determina- achieved. "lion, freedom and independence in a united Namib- 1 (\'1 un.....,:'" .,...... 'T_:.,,,,,A M ...,:~_.. .,~ __ 1,... ~t' ....."" the violation of human ri2hts and the continued acts • VJ. .... UQ~ l~ ~u" V UI~,",U 1 'IQUVlliJ tV IIla1\."; VI UI"; f . , 'gh-b ' AfJ . S b persistent colonial and illegal situation existing in 0 aggression agamst nel ourmg ncan tates y Namibia? Have we unconsciously abandoned Na- South Africa. In this context, my delegation believes 'b' d ' I d k I . h h f that countries having leverage on South Africa ml la an ItS peop e an ta en so ace m t e ec oes 0 should endeavour to avert a situation which has been our own voices and the records of votes on resolu- tions relevant to this matter? Has the interpretation declared a threat to international peace and security. of the uni9ueness of Namibia as a United Nations 110. My delegation believes that, in our endeavours responsibility engendered a hard core of resistance to to persuade the friends of South Africa to bring the applicability of the principles of self-determina- pressure to bear on the racist regime, we should at the tion, thereby ensuring the furtherance ofthe econom- same time speak out frankly and not hesitate to let ic and strategic interests of some countries in south- them know about our attitude towards their alliance, em Africa?' which it is felt is undermining the United Nations 104. Namibia and its people are being shamelessly position on Namibia. exploited and humiliated, and it is our view that the Ill. At this juncture my delegation would like to United Nations would not have found itself in such make some observations concerning the policy of an awkward position had it moved swiftly and stood constructive engagement of one of the Western on firm ground, calling South Africa's bluff, in the members of the Contact Group. Our perception of implementation of Security Council resolution 435 other aspects of this policy is not viewed as generally (1978), when the racist regime informed the Council negative, but it poses some difficulties as applied to that it had accepted that resolution in its final and certain matters which are in direct conflict with the coun~ri~s of origin. Tho~e economic.aC?tivities in ist Cuban forces from Angola is unacceptable. It is Namlbla.a~e completely ahen to t~e baSIC mterests of completely extraneous to the issue of Namibian the Namlblan people and.do nothmg t~ promote the independence. In addition, it is known that the devel.ol?~ent of the va.nous economic sectors for People's Republic ofAngola and Cuba have declared Na!D~~la s ben~fit after mdependence. In~~e~, ~hose that the gradual withdrawal of the Cuban forces is activIties constItute an obstacle to Namibia s mde- possible, subject to the following conditions: first, pendence. withdrawal of the racist forces from Angola; second- 1',3. The evidence contained in the relevant docu- ly, implementation ofthe Security Council resolution mentation submitted to this session and the debate in granting independence to Namibia and the with- the Fourth Committee-at its 3rd, 5th and 19th drawal of South African forces from Na~ibia; third- meetings-on forel\~.n economic and military activi- ly, an end to all acts or threats ofaggressIOn by South ties in Namibia snO\~' the existence of collusion Africa, the United States and their allies; and, between South Africa and some Western countries, fourthly, an end to all assistance by the United States especially the United States and Israel, to sustain and and the racist regime in South Africa to the counter- encourage the Pretoria regime to perpetuate its revolutionary forces in Angola. occupation of that Territory. 129. The people of Namibia are victiJ;11s of the 124. The so-called policy of constructive engage- ~acist,col~nial p'ol,icy ofthe So~th Afri~anregim~e ~nd ment pursued by some States towards the racist It~ albe~,lmperlahst forces .whlc~ provlde.'that regime regime of South Africa has indeed hel~d and With military a~d econo.mlc asslsta.nce..Th~y a~e.the encouraged that regime to continue its mhuman s~me f~rces whl~h prOVide the racist Ziomst re.gl!De polic¥. ofapartheid and has strengthened its hold over With the wherewlth~l to oppress the Arab Palestlman Namibia people, brothers ofthe Namibian people suffering the . . . same pli~t. The similarity between the two racist 125. The so-called polIcy of constructive enU2e- ...t....:.......... ...4''-'_ A4''':A'' .._..I I".A I :~ ._..1.... ..1.~ -_:_~ . h' b - - d - - ·"15&&U"" ". ""'u ~•••"'CI ClUU .".CI " "VUCI! "U'" I:1JUU" me~nt I~ not m~ ut a manoeuvre an an atternpt at reason for their close collaboration in all fields, deception: It IS one of t.he pretexts.used to .put especially in the military and nuclear fields, in the obst.acles ID the.way ofthe Imple~entat.lon ofUmted hope ofcontinuing their oppression and perpetuating NatIOns. r~sol_utlons on ~he.grantmg of m~ependence their domination over the African and Arab peoples. to Namibia. The truth IS Simply ttiat the mterests of . .. South Africa and its friends are the main reason for 130. ~mocratlc ~emen, whl1~ calhng. for the delaying the granting of independence to Namibia ~rompt lmplementatl0!l of Se~uf1ty ~ouncIl r~solu- and for the pressures exerted against its population !Ion 435, (1978) .regardl~g. the l!Dmedlate grantmg .of and neighbouring independent African States. The md~~ndenc~ to Namibia, Wishes to reaffir~.Its racist regime could not continue its defia~lce of the unbmlted support for.the.struggle.of the Namlblan international community without the ongoing assis- people for self-de.termmatlOn and. mdepende~c.e un- tance of the United States and some other Western der the lel:!dershlp of S~APO, Its sole legltlm~te countries and Israel in the military, economic and representatiVe. De~ocratlc Y~men also ~eaffirms Its diplomatic fields. It is that support which emboldens ~upptll1 fort~e.Afrlcan fr~nt.bne ~tat~s ID c~nfront- the racist South African regime to refuse to comply 109 a11Im~rtabst and racI~t con~plracles deslgne~ to with the relevant resolutions of the General Assem- weaken tllelr resolve to resist racism and occupatIon. bly and the Security Council on the granting of 131. We call upon the United Nations and the independence to Namibia. In recent years that .intetnational community to impose comprehensive, sup'port has extended directly and indirectly to the mandatory economic. sanctions against the racist military and nuclear fields, inclUding secret arms regime in' South Africa and to ensure the total shipments as well. That Can only lead to increasing isolation of that inhuman regime. ry~ Backed by the support it has been able to obtain the tralJic and pathetic plight ofthe Namibian people. in certain capitals, Pretoria contrives at each stage of There IS, therefore, no need for me to rehearse the the negotiations to introduce new conditions. In this several resolutions and decisions adopted by the connection, we reiterate that any attempt to intra- General Assembly and the Security Council demand- duce any element irrelevant to the implementation of ing the withdrawal of the racist regime of South resolution 435 (1978) is unacceptable. Africa from Namibia. Nor is it necessary for me to 162. The Contact Group, which shouldered a major bore the Assembly with details of the efforts that responsibility' in the pi·eparation and adoption ofthe have been made-without any success, I might say- settlement plan, must demonstrate real political.will to se~u.re the w~th~rawal of the racist regim~ from and exert greater pressure on the South AfrIcan NamIbIa. All thIS IS too well known to reqUIre any Government to comply with the provisions of resolu- further elaboration. tio~ 435 (197~), t~e sole yalid framework.'Yithin 171. My ~elegation. remains. se!iously ,concerned whl.ch .a solutIOn In ~eepIng WIth the legItimate about the sItuation In NamibIa In particular and, aspIratIOns of the Namlbian people may be found. indeed, in southern Africa in general. It is a matter 163. Furthermore, one of the members of the for deep regret that the danger posed to international Contact Group, a permanent member of the Security peace and security by the continued illegal occupa- Council, has itself pointed out the inadequacy of the tion ofNamibia by die racist South African regime is action taken by that group. It has learned a lesson not recognized by .:hose Powers that wilfully and in and at the same time shown us what little hope we an arrogant manner continue openly to encourage the can' place in' that group, unless, in a final push, it Pretoria regime to persist in its open defiance of the seriously'sets about its task of brilllging all its weight Organization. to bear on the s~de ofla\y and justice. It ~,?uld in that 172. The whole world has witnessed the bizarre way h~ve kept ItS prOI~l1SeS to.the Namlblan .people, spectacle of the past couple of weeks, in which the to Africa and to the InternatIonal commumty. racist regime has launched a vicious, unprovoked 164. The United Nations, to whose principles we and barbaric attack against innocent, defenceless are firmly dedicated, must change its approach, and blacks whose only crime is that they dare to speak out compel South Africa to respect its resolutions, in- against apartheid, a system which, as we all know, cluding resolution 435 (1978), which, as we have dehumanizes them and renders them stateless in said, remains the sole valid basis for a negotiated their own country. settlement. 173. Standing Committee 11 of the United Nations 165. We believe that, in the interest ofintemational Council for Namibia, in its report on the activities of peace and security, the Security Council should not foreign economic interests operating in Namibia,9 hesitate, given Pretoria's arrogance, to take effective noted that the plunder of the natural and human measures, in accordance with_the releya~t_Micles of resources of Namibia by South African and other Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, to foreign economic interests continues unabated and in protect the territorial integrity of Namibia and the contravention of Decree No. I for the Protection of inalienable right of the Namibian. people ·to self- the Natural Resources of Namibia,2 enacted in 1974. determination and independence. That re~rt further noted that the illegal occupation 166. .By making use of the possibilities offered by of NamIbia by apartheid South Africa has resulted in Chapter VII ofthe Charter, it is still p«?ssible to spare a colonial economy characterized by the siphoning the peoples of southern Africa the risks of a serious off of the Territory'$ extensive natural resources and confrontation. Moreover, those possibilities for ac- its captive labour force by transnational corporations tion should not be subject to the political will of based in South Africa, Western Europe and North certain Powers which, particularly in the Security America. Council, have paralysed the UnIted Nations and 174. Here lies the crux ofthe problem. While South made its action ineffective. Africa ignores the international 90mmunity, the 167. 'We venture to hope that wisdom and realism connivance of its Western allies makes it safe for will prevail and that by pooling our efforts we shall their transnational corporations to exploit Namibia. be able to ensure that long-term interests will take We reject as hypocritical and tendentious the argu- precedence over the short-term interests that rule the ment that the activities of these Western transnation- choices of some, and to compel Pretoria to face the al corporations contribute in any meaningful way to single, clear reality and with(lraw from" Namibia in the lives of the Namibian peop'e. accordance with the Unit~d Natiop~s~tt!eme~t plan. 17~. :The continu~l use ofth~ veto by South, Africa's 168. Efforts ~ndertaken by allwlthsIncerlty and lalhes m the SecurIty Counctl, makmg United Na- faith in the force of law and the obligations of the 'tions actions and ptoposals impotent, must be s~tisfaction the agreement reached between Angola people, particularly through their support for the and South Africa on 16 February 1984 at Lusaka on United Nations Institute for Namibia, and they the strengthening and monitoring of the military reaffirm their readiness to assist in the development diseng~gement in southern Angola. They commend of a free and independent Namibia. the efTortsof all parties concerned to bring about increased security and stability in the region and express the hope that these developments will con- tribute to a climate of mutual confidence which will facilitate the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). The Ten deeply regret, how- ever, that South Africa's illegal occupation ofNamib- ia in defiance of resolution 385 (1976) continues and .that hopes for a settlement remain as yet unfulfilled. 188. The Ten strongly condemn all acts of violence and intimidation committed in Namibia. These acts, including the practice of arbitrary arrests and deten- tions without trial, cause great suffering to the local population. The recent imposition by South Africa of military conscription of all Namibian males between the a~es of 17 and 55 to serve in its army occupying NamIbia is of profound concern to the Ten and they strongly deplore it. 189. There is deep international concern about the delay in securing Namibian independence. Imple- m'entation of the United Nations settlement plan is an urgent requirement. Six years have now passed since the Security Council adopted resolution 435 (1978) endorsing the plan. The Ten reiterate their rejection of any dilatory tactics employed by South Africa to perpetuate its illegal occupation ofNamibia and to impose an internal settlement on its people. The Ten will continue to work for and support all The meeting rose at 6 p.m. NOTES I I