A/40/PV.51 General Assembly

I wish to draw the attention of the General Assembly to the report of the Special Political Committee contained in document A/40/80S. May I take it that the General Assembly takes note of that report? It was so decided.

Before calling on the first speaker in the debate, I should like to propose that the list of speakers on this item be closed tomorrow, Tuesday, at 5 p.m. It was so decided.

I now call on the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid, Mr. Garba of Nigeria, who will also speak in his capacity as Chairman of the Group of African States. Mr. GARBA (Nigeria), Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid: Mr. President, I thank you for calling on me to open the debate on agenda item 35, "Policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa", in my dual capacity as Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid and Chairman of the Group of African States for this month of OCtober. I have had a prior opportunity to congratulate you on your election as President of the General Assembly at its fortieth session but I should like to recall that you represent a country which stands like a bridge between the continents of Africa and Europe, a gateway between the Atlantic and the Mediterranean. Sp~in's geographic position and history have given it a rich heritage of humanism, cultural diversity and racial tolerance F and these qualities can be seen wherever Spain has carried its influence in the world. I wish to express appreciation for your personal commitment, Mr. President, to the struggle against apartheid and for the way in which you have spoken out, from the lofty podium you occupy, against the inequities of the racist regime. (Mr. Garba, Chairman, Special ~ornmittee against Apartheid) In the debate on the fortieth anniversary celebrations of the organization, speaker after speaker, looking back at its relatively brief history, reaffirmed the noble principles on which it was fo',nd~~, recalled the high hopes with whi~h it was launcbed and reflected upon th,~ mr~agreness of the results achieved, the disillusionment, the ,alf between wha~ was expected and what had been achieved - the gulf between aims and achievements, between lofty principles and the sordid reality. The failure of the international community to accomplish its basic purpose and implement its agreed decisions has been nowhere greater than in the case of racial discrimination and exploitation in South ~frica. No other problem has been on the United Nations agenda for so long, no other issue has been so thoroughly debated, and on no other question has there been such unanimity and universal agreement. Yet, as the Assembly opens the debate on this item for the fortieth year in succession, the condition of the black population in South Africa is worse than it was in 1946. The few rUdimentary rights which they had at that time were taken away from them in 1948, when racial discrimination was codified and made systematic. The question is: why? In the intervening years, the racist regime has put in place a whole series of laws and regulations - the Group Areas Act, the Influx Control Law, the Bantu Education Act - and the system of homelands and bantustans, the sole purpose of which is to deprive the blacks of every right, to exploit their labour ruthlessly and to crush with an iron hand the struggle of the oppressed people for their rights and freedom. In his two most recent statements, the President of the Qpartheid regime has left no one in any doubt about the regime's determination to maintain intact all the essencial elements of apartheid - its denial of the equal worth of human beings, its rejection of the legitimate political rights of the black population as (Mr~ Garba, Chairma~, Special Committee Against Apartheid) the majority, its determination to continue the exploitation and despoliation of the black popul~~ion, in the guise of creating separate homelands and independent bantustans for that population. Mr. Botha - who seem6 to have succeeded in impressing some of his western supporters by a few so-called reforms of a cosmetic nature - has made it clear, by word and by deed, that the racist regime will use the maximum force and repression in order to maintain white supremacy in South Africa. In the last 12 months, more than 800 PeOple have been killed - most of them at the hands of the police and security forces and 250 of them in the last two months, since the state of emergency was proclaimed in parts of the country. The number of injured is much greater and at last count over 4,000 persons had been arrested, detained and banned in the same period. The great majority of the legitimate and indigenous black leadership is behind bars, and some of the most prominent among them are facing trial on treason charges. A~ninst that background of relentless violence and bloodshed, what hope can still be reasonably entertained for a peaceful settlement of the South African crisis? What role can the United Nations play, as the crisis moves inexorably to a head, to prevent catastLophe? The Special Committee's recommendations on the future course of action are contained in its annual report, which will shortly be presented to the Assembly by the Rapporteur. I shall therefore not go into the matter in detail. The centerpiece of these recommendations, as in years past, is the imposition of sanctions - comp~ehensive and mandatory under Chapter VII - and, meanwhile, every sort of action by Governments, governmental and non-governmental organizations, private groups and even individual sportsmen, artists, performers and so forth, to isolate the racist regime, to bring home to it in the most concrete way possible (Mr. Garba, Chairman, Special Committee Against Apartheid) the world's revulsion and outrage at its actions and policies, to make the cost of maint~ining apartheid unbearable and to tell the apartheid regime that time is indeed running out. The Special Committee has recommended such action year after year, for many years now, and the General Assembly has adopted numerous resolutions endorsing those recommendations. It is well to recall that the United Nations did not decide on this course of action capriciously or out of vindictiveness. The call for sanctions must be seen against the early united Nations attempts at mediation and conciliation. In the early years, the united Nations recommended a round-table conference in South Africa, called for the holding of a national convention of genuine representatives of all the people in South Africa, and appealed to - indeed implored - the regime to reverse its policies. The apartheid regime rejected or ignored all those efforts and, on the contrary, as I have just said, went about more ruthlessly and at greater speed entrenching a system for the despoliation and exploitation of the black population. I spoke a moment ago of the failure of the United Nations to do anything in the face of South Africa's defiance of its decisions and resolutions, and So~th Africa'S challenge to the very ideals and concepts on which the Organization is founded. But let us put matters in perspective: The failure is not a failure of the United Nations as an Organization, nor of the great majority of its Member states. If the United Nations has not been able to act more decisively, it is because it has been prevented from doing so by a small group of countries - the very countries that have the principal responsibility for the peace and security of the world and that are usually the most vocal in criticizing the Organization's alleged ineffectiveness and double standards• (Mr. Garba, Chairman, Special Committee Against Apartheid) On the other hand, if the veto of the western Powers has prevented the United Nations itself froll acting decisively, the united Nations has unquestionably played a key role in generating the great wave of anti-apartheid sentiment which is sweeping the world. General Assembly resolutions have established the international jurisprudence on apartheid, as it were. It is the General Assembly's resolutions, based on the recommendations of its Special Committee against Apartheid, which have inspired the multitude of actions against apartheid now being taken all over the world. In the last 12 months the Special Committee has held two seminal conferences. The North American Regional Conference, which was organiZed in June 1984, brought together all major non-governmental organizations in Canada and the united States. The proposals and ideas which the Conference generated have been followed by action by trade unions, municipalities, State legislatures and the Congress itself, and even by action by many business corporations, banks and financial institutions. The Ad Hoc Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against Apartheid in Sports, has held a series of formal meetings and informal consultations in pursuance of the relevant provisions of General Assembly resolution 39/72 D of 13 December 1984. These meetings, conducted by Mr. Ernest Besley Haycock, Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee, have resulted in agreement on the draft convention and finalization of the work of the Ad Hoc Committee by the submission of the draft convention to the fortieth session of the General Assembly for adoption. I commend the Ad Hoc Committee for a job well done and should like to seize this opportunity to appeal strongly to all Member States for the speedy signature, ratification, approval and acceptance of the convention, which will help to complete the isolation of apartheid in sports. Committee Against Apartheid) . . . The'Sp&cial Committee has tak~n action also to mobilize the world of arts and culture in the struggle again~t apartheid. An exhibition of paintings by some of the ~oremost contemporary artists, sponsored by the sPecial COmMittee, opened in Paris oB year ago, has been shoWn in all major European countries and will form the . . . nucleus of a museum of apartheid in South Africa when that country is liberated. This year, as is well known, the popular singer Stevie Wonder came to this Assembly Rall on the invitation of the Special Committee and sang a message of solidarity to those engaged in the struggle against apartheid. The popular impact of Stevie Wonder's action was such that the South African regime put a ban on the playing of his music in that country. COMmittee Against Apartheid) ., The Special Committee has sent missions to front-line States and other regions in pursuit of its objectives. It has arranged meetings and consultations with eminent leaders and statesmen to diecuss action against apartheid. In the course of the past week, the Special Committee was honoured by the presence of Father Walther Lini, Pri,me Minister of Vanuatu, Mr. Rajiv Gandhi, Prime Minister of India and Mr. David Lange, Prime Minister of New Zealand, all of whom addressed the Special Committee. In the critical period that we are now entering the Special Committee will have to undertake even greater responsibilities. However, before referring to the Special Committee's recommendations, which will be explained in detail by the Rapporteur when he presents the Committee's annual report, I should like to review the situation that has prevailed in South Africa and the region during the past year. Just IS months ago the apartheid regime seemed to be convinced, that it was on the verge of breaking out of 2S years of international isolation. In the aftermath of the signing of the Nkomati Accord with Mozambique, Pretoria paraded internationally as the peac~maker of southern Africa, and the racist regime's Prime Minister, P. W. Botha, was able to make a tour of Western European capitals which would have been unthinkable before Nkomati. The apartheid regime interpreted all this to mean that its claim to be the regional Power with legitimate interests in southern Africa was noo~ accepted by the Western Powers. It was believed that the accord had dealt a fatal blow to the liberation movements and that resistance from its own black population could gradually be worn down. Emboldened by those developoments, the South African Government finally imposed its so-called constitution in September 1984. That so-called new constitution was based on a new and racially segregated tricameral parliament which ~ittee against Apartheid) ·shared power· by totally excluding the African majority and keeping power firmly in white hands. Again, although the international community saw through this charade, the United States of America, encouraged by Pretoria, unfortunately declared the new dispensatio~ a step in the right direction. The regime seemed genuinely to believe that the Coloured and Asian sections of the oppressed majority could be deluded by the trappings of a toothless and segregated parliament. It blithely dismissed the overwhelming boycott by the so-called Coloured and Indian population of elections to that new parliament. In short, a year ago the South African Government was oozing confidence bordering on arrogance. It was sure that it had inflicted irreversible setbacks on the enemies of apartheid. Yet, at the very height of that apparent triumph, the house of apartheid began to collapse around the regime. The opening of the new tricameral parliament - that is, the imposition of the racist constitution in September 1984 - ignited an explosion of black anger far deeper, more determined and better organized than the student uprising of 1976 and in the tense year of Sharpeville in 1960. A year later, the regime is confronting an ever-widening popular revolt which, as we have seen, it cannot contain. That revolt began with a rent strike, appropriately, in the Sharpeville township last September. The spectacle of apartheid police again shooting unarmed civilians in Sharpeville unleashed resistance by virtually all social strata of the black population in almost all areas of the country. An organized general strike by close on 90 per cent of the black workforce in South Africa's industrial heartland in November gave the lie to the myth that black workers would not use their newly organized muscle in political actions. That strike was closely linked to efforts by black students, who organized strikes and demonstrations in the face of intense intimidation. More than a million black students have boycot~ed the classrooms of apartheid's educational system in the past year. In January of this year the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC) called on the black population to make the black townships Wungovernablew• Just six months later the regime acknowledged the success of that campaign by declaring a state of emergency in 36 magisterial districts. The state of emergency has now been extended to-the Cape Townoarea. Today, the authority of the apartheid State can be enforced in those areas only by large concentrations of heavily armed police '0 and soldiers travelling in mine-proofed armoured personnel carriers. Whips, tear gas, bullets, prison and torture are the face the Government presents to its own population. Yet the arrest of virtually the entire leadership of the United Democratic Front, the announcement of one of the biggest treason trials in 20 years and even the declaration of a state of emergency, did not end the revolt. In March of this year the regime's police marked the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Sharpeville massacre with a repeat performance in which at least 20 people were shot dead in the township of Uitenhage. A total of almost 800 people have been killed in protests against the regime over the past year. All but a handful of them were black. The vast majority of them were shot by apartheid's security forces. Thousands more have been detained. Torture of political prisoners is now so routine that the courts have finally forbidden police to assault detainees - after nearly 25 years of ignoring charges of torture brought against the Security Police. The South African army is in virtually permanent military occupation of the black townships of its own country. People all over the world have been shocked by dramatic television coverage of the brutal tactics of the State and have applauded the limitless courage of unarmed black youths who time and again face whips, tear gas, bullets and armoured cars with stones and jeers. Death squads have now also made a grisly appearance in South Africa. At least five prominent anti-apartheid activists have been viciously murdered. Yet resistance continues ~nabated. 'Foreign confidence in the apartheid economy has plummeted, as Bishop Tutu told us this morning. ~ number of nervous international banks which have long dealt with the apartheid regime have announced that they will not roll over short-term South African debts of more than $Us 10 billion. The apartheid regime immediately defaulted by suspending repayment of debt principal until the end of the year. The South African currency, the rsnd, has fallen to its lowest level ever and is now worth barely one quarter of its 1980 United States equivalent. In short, over 16 months of determined resistance by South Africa's oppressed black majority has shattered Pretoria's smug confidence, so manifest only a year ago. International actions have played a prominent and important part in reversing the situation. I have already referred to the crucial and seminal role played by the United Nations in promoting those actions. In the past year, pressure for economic disengagement from South Africa has increased beyond anything we have seen before. In a number of Western countries the popular abhorrence of apartheid has been galvanized by developments inside South Africa. In the United States particularly a broad coalition of democratic groups has mounted an impressive and prolonged c~aign for disengagement from apartheid that has brought the issue into sustained pUblic discussion and stimulated significant disinvestment from companies dealing with South Africa. Committee against Apartheid) The vicious oppression and total intransigence of the apartheid regime in the past months have likewise galvanized action by a number of countries and international bodies. In recent months Australia, Japan, the European Economic Community (EEC), the united States, Canada and, most recently, the Commonwealth Beads of Government and the Nordic coun~ries, have all announced either new or intensified actions against the 'Pretoria regime. Those actions vary widely in scope and in depth. Some were manifestly announced only to pre-empt more comprehensive measures already in progress through national legislatures and represent little more than tokenism. Others, and I again must single out the l(",·~tdic countries, propose far-reaching measures an part of working towards comprehensive, mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. Allow me to commend those organizations and Governments which have announced disengagement actions. Allow me also to hope that such actions will start a ground swell. But important as unilateral action is, such steps do not go nearly far enough. I hope to return to this issue in my concluding remarks. This grOWing international action against apartheid, taken in the context of the regime's inability to control the popular revolt and the rapid deterioration of South Africa's standing in international economic circles, has generated something of a panic in the country's business community. Today a deep political crisis confronts the white community as a whole, and the regime's own political base in that community seems to have been seriously eroded. Important sections of the white establishment seem finally to have rel~ognized that apartheid offers no secure future to themselves, their children and their ivnestments. In September some of South Africa's most influential business leaders held an unprecedented meeting with the banned African National Congress of South Africa (ANe) in·Lusaka. They were followed a month later by leaders of the official white opposition party. A propo~2d visit to ARC headquarters by a group of Afrikaner students was stopped when the regime withdrew their passports. A stmi~r visit by eminent churchmen will undoubtedly be similarly prevented. Other important signs of political disaffection with apartheid among whites have also appeared. A still small but growing number of white youths are refusing to serve in apartheid's army. The regime reported this year that over 7000 white youths had failed to report for statutory military service. Such signs of division among South Africa's white population are important and should be encouraged. But we should be very careful not to overestimate their extent or, indeed, their effect. As yet, not one single element in the white establishment has come up with a programme to dismantle apartheid. The so-called Setter Way recently announced by a large group of business leaders falls far, far short of such a programme. In evidence given at recent public hearings held by the Commission on Transnational Corporations under the mandate of the united Nations Economic and Social Council, th~ .epresentatives of organized South African businesses declared their opposition to a universal franchise in a unitary State. Their proposed reforms remind me of nothing so much as the manoeuvrings in other parts of Africa in the late 1950s and 1960s by colonial settlers anxious to avoid majority rule. Perhaps it is worth reiterating what seem to be the minimum demands of black south Africans, what they mean by a dismantling of apartheid. To win any real support in the bl~ck community, such measures would have to include, at the very least, the following: abolition of the Group Areas Act, total abolition of the system of influx con~rol and pass laws, an end to all forced removals, freedom for all political prisoners, an end to the system of racial classification in which every single South African is assigned by the State to one of four racial categoriesi abolition of the bantustans and bantu educational system and, most importantly, one person, one vote in a unitedr democratic ~nd non-racial society. The present South African Government is totally incapable of even beginning to ~ntemplate such changes. Much talk has been heard of reform, but the vague an~ superficial proposals thus far put forward; ~eluctantly and conditionally, are simply an aaditional insult to black South Africans. The racist regime's President has left no one in any doubt that he does not contemplate now~ or at any future time, any f~ndamental change in the basic tenets of apartheid. But, for the benefit of those who find encouragement in some of the regime's recent moves, I shQuld lit~ concretely to examine what some of them indeed mean. In A~gust President Botha held out the prospect of a possible restoration of South African citizenship to the inhabitants of the so-called independent bantustans. On closer examination it seems that the puppet bantustan governments will be asked if they want a secondary citizenship for their citizens. This proposal envisages people being citizens of both phantom entities, such as the so-called Republic of Transkei, and the real, but still apartheid, Republic of South Africa. Mr. Botha' s (, ;,)sest lieutenants hastened to add that bantustans would not be dismantled and that those possibly reinstated South African citizens would of course not enjoy any political rights in the South African State. We were then told that a commission of the President's Council had recommended the scrapping of the pass laws and influx-control system. This was also soon clarified to mean that only orderly and controlled movement from the rural areas to the cities would be permitted. So we will not have influx control, just the same system under another name. To Mr. Botha's Government, changing apartheid seems to mean just changing the names. (Mr. Garba, Chairman, Special Commitcee Against Apartheid) Then, on 30 September this year, Mr. Botha declared that to give black south Africans the vote in a unitary State would somehow, in his words, ·cause greater stru9gl~ and mo~e bloodshed than we are experiencing today·. Mr. Botha announced that bJ~cks would soon enjoy a universal franchise in what he called a ·united· State~ This as yet unspecified structure seems to consist of a multiplicity of units that would be recognized on a geographical and group basis. This, we are told, would ensure that one group is not placed in a situation where it can dominate other g~oups. This nebulous new system is thus nothing but an attempt to maintain that white domination. It is a plan for a racist federation which would divide the black majority int~ tribal, ethnic, rural and urban units and an as yet unspecified political structure which would be designed to maintain white power, white privilege and white control - quite simply, apartheid under another name. Such measures, I dare say, are worthless in South Africa today. They serve only to show yet again that even at this late and ~~sperate hour Mr. Botha's Government has no intentions of abandoning apartheid and is totally incapable of rethinking even the most simple of apartheid's prescriptions. The actions of the South African Government over the past year show conclusively that its only substantive response to the domestic and international demand to dismantle apartheid is more repression. (Mr. Garba, Chairman, Special Committee Against Apartheid) Not even the most unreconstructed apologist for the Pretoria regime can now claim that "it is moving in the right direction", that it has taken "the first steps" on the difficult road to reform. Mr. Botha has indicated quite clearly that he has no intention·of scrapping the basic provisions of apartheid, of freeing political prisoners, of even greeting, let alone negotiating with, the real leaders of the majority of the South African people. Anyone who still believes in his semantic evasions, who still feels that the Botha regime can be brought around by diplomatic blandishments and "constructive engagement" and so forth, can only be wilfully blind and woefully deaf and mischievously in complicity with apartheid South Africa. The bell~gerent intentions of the apartheid regime are further clearly revealed in its actions in southern Africa this past year. The regime still refuses to end its illegal occupation of Namibia and has instead installed yet another puppet administration o Angola and Botswana have been SUbjected to brutal interventions by the South African army. The catalogue of South African aggression is well known in this Assembly and I shall not bore you with any more details. Permit me to make just one further observation. When the South African Government signed the Nkomati Accord with Mozambique 22 months ago, it proclaimed its commitment to what it called "the peace process". As the attacks against the people and Government of Mozambique actually increased after Nkomati, the South African Government loudly denied any involvement and reiterated its fervent attachment to its own brand of "peace". All I can say is that the word "peace- must mean something very different in the racist regime's lexicon from its meaning in every other language. (Mr. Garba, Chairman, Special Committee Against Apartheid) The South African Government finally admitted in September that it did indeed violate the Nkomati Accord, trying brazenly to dismiss this as "technical violations". These technical violations actually include building an air strip in Mozambique for the MNR, supplying it by air and by submarine with food and arms, and sending a Minister of the South African Government into Mozambique on a number of secret missions to confer with the MNR. I ask you to stop and imagine for just one minute what would have happened had the Mozambican Government taken the same kind of action to show its continued support for and solidarity with the ANC. There are very simple words in every language in the world to describe such acts. The words are "duplicity· and "war". These were acts of war committed against Mozambique whilst Pretoria piously proclaimed a commitment to peace. And the word to describe individuals or Governments who proclaim one thing whilst doing its opposite is also simple: it is "liar". The apartheid regime has now admitted these lies to the whole world. And yet the regime and one or two Governments represented in this body ask us to believe Pretoria's sincere desire to "reform" apartheid. No, as we have said often enough, apartheid cannot be reformed, it cannot be made more pleasant or less onerous. It should and must be dismantled and eliminated. Ending apartheid is a task for the people of South ~frica, and one which they have already begun. Yet the international community can and should play a very important role in this process. We are this year celebrating the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations. ~s I said in my opening remarks, in this anniversary year it is useful to remind ourselves that apartheid has been one of the most enduring prcblems to have confronted this body throughout its history. The United Nations as early as 1946 (Mr. Garba, Chairman, Special Committee Against Apartheid) declared its intention to bring about an end to systematized, statutory racial discrimination in South Africa. In the intervening 39 years, the situation in that country has deteriorated beyond measure. We in the Special Committee believe that there do exist meaningful measures that the united Nations can take which will not only help speed the end of this abhorrent system but, perhaps more importantly, will do so with the minimum amount of violence possible. Violence is today the predominant motif of life in South Africa. Though the apartheid regime is weaker and more divided than ever before, it retains a formidable capacity for violence. And Mr. Botha has shown himself quite prepared to use it. In his much heralded speech on 15 August he declared that he had so far been very patient and very restrained. By then 500 blacks had been killed. How many more South Africans will die - black and white - as Bishop Tutu said this morning, when Mr. Botha abandons "restraint- and goes the whole hog? The international community needs to act now. Much has been done by individual countries, and even though some have taken only symbolic or token measures, we applaud these actions. But unilateral action and symbolic condemnations of apartheid are no longer enough. The apartheid regime has ignored four decades of warnings and condemnation. As the sports boycott and other actions have decisively shown, it responds only to palpable pressure in areas which go to the heart of its interests. International action against apartheid must now be based on a clear and comprehensive strategy rather than piecemeal measures. Such action must be designed to be effective rather than symbolic. Fortunately there exists a range of peaceful measures which will achieve exactly this result. The report of the Special Committee contains a series of recommendations for such action. At their heart is a programme of comprehensive, mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the united Nations Charter. The structure of the apartheid econom¥ renders it unusually vulnerable to external pressure. South Africa imports an unusually high proportion of intermediate goods and almost all of the technology needed to run its industrial sector. Without foreign investment, foreign loans, foreign oil supplies, let alone foreign trade, it simply could not function. We are told that sanction~ will drive the whites into the twentieth century equivalent of the ~~ger from which the nineteenth century Boer colonists defeated African armies. Those Boers had to buy their guns from external producers. Their modern descendants now make their own guns but, without foreign machinery, oil, finance and technology, they simply could not do so. I urge this Assembly to recognize its obligations to the black majority of south Africans who are daily exposed to those guns. Let us help silence them so that future generations of South Africans can point with gratitude to the united Nations. This body today confronts seemingly intractable problems in many areas of the world. South Africa is one of the few where all Members are unanimous in the assessment of the problem. In this anniversary year, let us translate this into unanimous action. Let us act now and act decisively in the very best traditions of the united Nations.

I now invite the Rapporteur of the Special Committee Against Apartheid, Mr. Bhaskar Kumar Mitra of India, to introduce the Special Committee's report. Committee Against Apartheid) Mr. MITRA (India), Rapporteur, Special Committee Against Apartheid: I have the honour, on behalf of the Special COllllllittee Against Apartheid, to present its annual report (A/40/22) and four special reports which are published as addenda to that document: first, a report on the implementation of the arms embargo against South Africa (A/40/22/Add.l)J secondly, a report on recent developments concerning relations between Israel and South Africa (A/40/22/Add.2)J thirdly, a report on further action to intensify efforts to inform world pUblic opinion and encourage wider public action in support of the just struggle of the oppressed people of South Africa (A/40/22/Add.3)J fourthly, a report on the implementation of General Assembly resolution 39/72 G of 13 December 1984 on concerted international action for the eltmination of apartheid (A/40/22/Add.4). The third special report contains a number of specific recommendations for an expansion of information activity with a view to mobilizing public awareness and public action in support of the liberation struggle against South Africa. The special reports in the first and fourth addenda relate to the efforts of the Special Committee to follow and encourage the implementa~ion of United Nations resolutions on apartheid, in particular resolution 39/72 G on concerted international action for the elimination of apartheid and the Security Council resolutions on the arms embargo against South Africa. They contain information received by the Special Committee from a number of Governments. Any additional information received after the adoption of these reports will be submitted to the General Assembly in addenda to the two special reports. The special report on recent developments concerning relations between Israel and South Africa (A/40/22/Add.2) has been prepared in accordance with paragraph 7 of resolution 39/72 G. The Special Committee recommends closer co-operation between the Department of Public Information and the Centre against Apartheid to disseminate information on the collaboration between Israel and South Africa. It also recommends that the General Assembly urge all States, in ,particular western States, not to extend any assistance which enhances the collaboration between those regimes. I now turn to the annual report, which contains a summary of the work of the Special Committee and a review of developments in South Africa in the past year, as well as a number of conclusions and recommendations. The Special Committee wishes to emphasize that the heroic struggle now being waged by the oppressed people of South Africa poses a grave challenge and at the same time provides an opportunity for the united Nations and Member States to take decisive action to secure, at last, the elimination of the inhuman system of apartheid in South Africa and enable the people of that country to establish a non-racial democratic State. The past year has witnessed an unprecedented mobilization of the people in the stuggle for liberation in defiance of indiscriminate and massive violence and savage repression by the apartheid regime. People of all walks of life and different racial origins - Africans, Coloured people, Indians and even some whites - are fighting shoulder to shoulder for freedom from racist tyranny. The Pretoria regime has resorted to a state of emergency and the deployment of armed forces in African townships. Hundreds of people have been killed and thousands injured, many of them children. Many thousands of leaders of the people have been imprisoned and the evidence received by the Special Committee on the torture of detainees is shocking. Prominent leaders of the United Democratic Front, the Natal Indian Congress and other groups have been charged with treason and face death sentences. Many students have been whipped for participating in strikes. But the popular resistance has not only continued unabated but is continuing to intensify, confronting the racist regime with its most serious and grave political and economic crisis ever. The oppressed people have continued to resist and the racist regime has been unable to control the situation, yet that regime continues to defy the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. Instead of ending the state of emergency it has extended it to Cape Town and neighbouring districts. Instead of releasing Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners it has imprisoned more leaders of the people. Instead of negotiating with the genuine leaders of the people it is even trying to prevent white churchmen, students and others from meeting representatives of the African National Congress. It is relying, as in the past, on repression and terror, combined with fraudulent offers of "reforms", to contain the situation. Since its creation the United Nations has upheld the inalienable rights of South Africa's black majority and focused world attention on the evils of apartheid. The United Nations can help avert further bloodshed if its instruments for applying pressure on the South African Government are utilized and supported by the international community. The United Nations and the international community have an opportunity, through concerted and decisive action, to fulfil their commitments to secure the liberation of South Africa. They must resist and counter all manoeuvres by the apartheid regime and its collaborators to contain the situation. The Special Committee has noted with satisfaction the development of international solidarity with the liberation struggle in South Africa and some positive action taken by a number of Governments and organizations. It considers it essential, however, to warn against any variations of so-called constructive engagement with the apartheid regime and to stress that isolated and limited Committee Against Aparthe d) actions by States are inadequate at this critical time. This is not a time for symbolic gestures or token measures. A delay in effective action will lead to a wider conflict in southern Africa, with all its repercussions. International action must be taken with a sense of urgency and must be firm enough to force the apartheid regime, with its record of stubborn defiance of the United Nations, to comply with resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. The Special Committee has therefore submitted a number of recommendations so that the United Nations and the international community may, through concerted and decisive action, fulfil their commitment to secure the liberation of South Africa. First, the Special Committee considers it essential that the General Assembly reaffirm the objectives of the United Nations to counter the problem of apartheid, contained in many unanimous resolutions, and to reject all manoeuvres of the apartheid regime and its collaborators to try to divert attention through so-called reforms by the racist regime or so-called power-sharing, or any other arrangements which do not involve the total eradication of apartheid. International action must be directed at secu~ing the liberation of all political prisoners and the ending of repression. The struggle of the oppr~ssed people of South Africa is for the total eradication of apartheid, and the dismantling of all the structures of apartheid including the bantustans and the obnoxious constitution of last year. The essential prerequisite for a peaceful solution is the unconditional release of Nelson Mandela, zephania Mothopeng and all other political prisoners and negotia~ions with the leaders of the struggle on modalities for the total elimination of apartheid, and to secure for the majority population of South Africa their inalienable right to self-determination and the establishment of a non-racial democratic State in which all the people of South Africa - irrespective of race or colour - will enjoy equal rights, including political rights. Secondly, in order tha~ ~hose objectives may be attained, the Special Committee stresses the tmpoL~ance and urgency of action under Chapter VII of the Charter and the need to exert all possible influence tp persuade the major western Powers to co-operate in such action. It urges that the Security Council take measures to strengthen the arms embargo, prohibit all c()-operation with South Africa in the nuclear field and ensure the effective monitoring of such measures in accordance with the report of the Security Council Committee established in pursuance of its resolution 421 (1977) and the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly. In this connection it attaches special importance to the prohibition of supply of "dual purpose" equipment, computers and technology for military and police use in South Africa. The Special Committee considers, moreover, that an effective embargo on the supply of petroleum products and other strategic supplies should be instituted without any further delay as an essential reinforcement of the mandatory arms embargo. Thirdly, the Special Committee attaches importance to action by local authorities and to the activities of anti-apartheid movements, trade unions, religious bodies and other non-governmental organizations in promoting action against apartheid. The sports, cultural, consumer and other boycotts against South Africa, involving millions of people, deserve to be comm~nded, encouraged and promoted. Committee Against Apartheid) The Special Committee expresses its satisfaction that the Ad Hoc Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against Apartheid in Sports has prepared a draft convention after extensive consultations. . It hopes that the convention will be adopted by the General Assembly and will soon come into force. Fourthly, the Special Committee stresses the need to increase greatly the present-level of assistance to the oppressed people of South Africa and their national liberation movements at this critical time. It recognizes an urgent need for a great increase in humanitarian and educational assistance in view of the widespread repression and killings by the apartheid regime, as well as an equally urgent need for direct assistance to the national liberation movements, as a demonstrative action in support of their legitimate struggle. It urges the General Assembly to address an urgent appeal for such assistance to Governments, governmental and non-governmental organizations and other institutions. Fifthly, the Special Committee calls for co-ordinated action by the United Nations and its agencies towards the total elimination of apartheid. It suggests that the General Assembly call upon the Secretary-General and all specialized agencies to end any other deposits or investments in, or any contracts with or the provision of facilities to, any banks or corporations operating in South Africa. United Nations agencies should cease all collaboration, direct and indirect, with the apartheid regime. Sixthly, the Special Committee emphasizes the importance of the development of international law against apartheid. It urges that no recognition should be accorded the apartheid regime or its racist constitution, which was denounced by the Security Council and the General Assembly as null and void. Any attempt to grant legitimacy to the apartheid regime must be condemned as a hostile,act against the majority of the people of South Africa. Finally, the Special Committee reiterates the imperative need for economic sanctions against South Africa as the main component of international action for the elimination of apartheid. The apartheid regime has consistently defied all resolutions of the United Nations, including resolution 569 (1985) adopted by the Security Council in JUly 1985. Is it not clear that there must be stronger action-to secure the implementation of that resolution and defend the credibility of the Security Council? The Charter of the United Nations in Chapter VII provides the means for such action - in particular mandatory sanctions to be applied by all States. In this connection the Special Committee would like to point out that the arguments by the apartheid regime and its friends - especially those which profit from the inhuman system of apartheid - against such sanctions have been increasingly recognized by world public opinion as fraudulent. Countering the propaganda that the black people in South Africa do not favour such sanctions, the oppressed people have not only urged the international community to end all collaboration with that regime but have, by their heroic struggle, forced foreign economic interests to reassess their involvement with the apartheid regime. The argument that economic sanctions are undesirable since they hurt the oppressed people is now clearly seen as essentially hostile to their legitimate aspirations. Such fallacious arguments should be firmly countered by the international community. While expressing appreciation to Governments that have taken significant unilateral measures, the special Committee considers that voluntary sanctions alone are inadequate. Sanctions to be fUlly effective must be universally applied. It therefore calls upon all Member States, among others, to exercise all their influence to persuade the Gcvernments of major western countries to facilitate the imposition of comprehensive and mandatory economic sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter of the united Nations. ~ese are some of the main recommendations of the Special Committee to which I wish to draw the Assembly's attention and to request it to consider and adopt the present annual report and special reports of the Special Committee. This is the fortieth session at which the problem of racism in Scuth Africa is being considered by the General Assembly. While the united Nations has made progress in developing international understanding and support for the great freedom struggle in South Africa, the apartheid regime has been able to build up its economic and military power - with the assistance of some Governments and transnational corporations - and sUbject the black people of South Africa to enormous suffering. As we observe the fortieth anniversary of the Organization, millions of black people are struggling heroically in South Africa for the principles of the united Nations. They appeal to the international community for effective support so that they can destroy apartheid and build a free society. They deserve our tribute and, even more, our wholehearted support in action. The Special Committee trusts that all Members will consider its recommendations in that spirit and enable the General Assembly and Security Council to take requisite action to secure the speedy elimination of apartheid and thereby further strengthen the United Nations

I now call on the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against Apartheid in sports, 'Mr. Ernest Besley Maycock of Barbados, to present the Ad Hoc Committee's report. Committee Against Apartheid) Mr. MAYCOCK (Barbados), Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against Apartheid in Sports: I have the honour and pleasu~e to introduce the ~eport of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against Apartheid in Sports contained in document A/40/36. After seven years of hard work, the Committee was able, on 26 August 1985, to complete drafting of the international convention. It is generally accepted that because South Africans are such avid sports fans, sports is obviously an excellent vehicle for use in fighting the abhorrent system of apartheid. Indeed, I believe that with the possible exception of economic action there can be no more effectiue way of getting the message to white South Africans and letting them know that the internal:onal community will no longer stand idly by while the racist regime in Pretoria continues unimpeded to trample on the basic rights of the vast majority of the population of South Africa. This is the objective of the international campaign against apartheid which is aimed at isolating the racist regime by preventing sportsmen representative of that regime from participating in international sporting events. On 14 December 1977, the General Assembly in resolution 32/105 M adopted the Declaration against Apartheid in Sports and requested the Ad Hoc Committee to draft an international convention against apartheid in sports with a view to strengthening the campaign against aparth~~id in sports and to achieving the isolation of the racist regime of South Africa from international sporting events. Within two years the Ad Hoc Committee was able to agree on the formulation of 21 draft articles aimed at fulfilling its mandate. These envisaged, among other things, varioas actions by Governments to ensure that their nationals do not participate in sporting activities in South Africa and that South Africans do not participate in sporting activities in their countries. In ~c~rdance ~1th the draft articles, Goveriwents would also undertake to join" international efforts to ha~e South Africa expelled from those international sporting federations of which it is still a member and to prevent South Africa from being reinstated to membership of those federations from which it has already been excluded. Completion of the Committee's mandate was, however, delayed until now because of difficulties in agreeing on the application of what has come to be known as Nthe third party principle-. During this period the Ad Hoc Committee had undertaken intensive negotiations and consultations with Governments, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as with individual sportsmen and the representatives of the liberation movements of South Africa. There was a view, very strongly held, that unless collaborators with apartheid sports were themselveb threatened with the possibility of an international boycott, the racist regime of South Africa, by use of its propaganda apparatus and by expendit~re of large sums of money, would continue to entice uninformed or uncaring sportsmen and women in its continuing quest to break the international campaign against apartheid sports. The proponents of this view felt that, if the international convention did not incorporate the 6O-called third party principle, the convention would be a weak instrument that would fall short of measures already applied by a large number of states. Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against Apartheid in Sports) Another view was founded on the fear that application of the third-party principle might lead to serious disruption of international sport. There was the additional fear that the third-party principle, if applied, might work to the disadvantage of States parties to the international convention rather than have any serious adverse effects on Pretoria and its friends. They argued that the international effort should focus on the exclusion of South Africa from membership of all international sporting federations and organizations that control international sporting events. The compromise we have reached with respect to the so-called third-party principle is embodied in draft article 10 of the draft convention. Draft article 10, which I regard as the heart of the convention, makes provisions for states parties to the convention to deny entry to sportsmen who have participated in sporting activities in South Africa and to sports officials who have invited South Africans representing that regime to participate in sporting activities in their countries, and to advise their national representatives to international sports federations to take all possible and practical steps to ensure the expulsion of South Africa from all sports fede~ations in which it still holds membership and to impose sanctions against national federations condoning sports exchanges with a country practising apartheid. The draft convention also stipulates that, in cases of flagrant violation of the provisions of the convention, States parties should take appropriate action as they deem fit, inclUding where necessary steps aimed at the exclusion of the responsible national sports governing bodies, national sports federations or sportsmen of the countries concerned, from international sports competition. Care Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against Apartheid in Sports) has been taken to ensure than any prohibition of entry should not violate the .::egulation of the relevant sports federations which support the elimination of apartheid in sport and should apply only to participation in sports activities. The draft convention that the Ad Hoc Committee elaborated contains a preamble and 22 articles. Draft article 1 defines expressions used in the draft convention. Draft article 2 condemns apartheid and requires States parties to take appropriate measures to eliminate the practice of apartheid in all its forms. The draft convention seeks in draft a~ticles 3, 4, 5 and 6 to establish certain obligations for States parties vis-A-vis their own nationals - all aimed at discouraging and/or preventing sports contacts between their nationals and apartheid sports. In draft articles 7 and 8 and paragraph 3 of draft article 10, States parties are required to take action aimed at the isolation of apartheid sports. Draft article 9 and paragraphs 1, 2 and 4 of draft article 10 envisage collective action on the part of States parties in the event that apologists for and supporters of apartheid sports seek to negate the aims and objectives of the draft convention. Draft articles 11, 12, 13 and 14 address the operation of the Commission against Apartheid in Sports, which is expected to play a significant role in ensuring proper implementation of the provisions of the draft convention. Draft articles 15 to 22 contain the final clauses of the draft convention. These provisions are similar to those contained in multilateral treaties deposited with the Secretary-General of the united Nations and reflect the most up-to-date practice in this regard. I wish to express thanks and appreciation to Member States and inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations that assisted the Ad Hoc Committee in reaching an agreement on the draft convention. I wish to place on record my thanks to the Organization of African Unity, the Supreme Council of sports in Africa and the South Africa Non-Racial Olympic Committee. Consultations with all these organizations proved to be invaluable. I wish to thank all the Governments that were gracious enough to receive delegations f~om the Ad Hoc Committee. Their advice, encouragement and co-operation contributed in no small measure to the completion of the Committee's mandate. The events that have unfolded in South Africa during this year demonstrate that the racist regime in Pretoria is susceptible to serious and sustained pressure. The dedication and determination of traditional opponents of the apartheid system, coupled with the savage and inhuman response of its defenders, have brought to the realization of the various sectors of that community that the system must be dismantled. The effect on the international community has been no less dramatic. Several Governments which had previously paid only lip service to the anti-apartheid cause have begun to take action in various forms with the declared intention of bringing the South African Government to its senses. The current climate would, therefore, seem to be ideal for the adoption of the International Convention against Apartheid in Sports. The adoption by the General Assembly of this draft will further intensify the pressure against apartheid in South Africa and ineVitably contribute to the early demise of the system. To this end, therefore, I should like to address a special appeal to Member States not only to adopt the draft convention but to sign and ratify it as soon as possible.

In accordance with the decision taken by the General Assembly at its 3rd plenary meeting, on 20 September 1985~ I call on the representative of the P~n Af~ica..ist Congress of Azania. Mr. MLAMBO (Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC»: At the very outset, Sir, allow me, on behalf of the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania, the custodian of the genuine aspirations of the oppressed, exploited, discriminated-against and dispossessed people of Azania, to contratulate you warmly on your unanimous election to the high and responsible office of President of the General Assembly. We are confident that under your wise and dedicated guidance the issues before it, especially the obnoxious system of apartheid, and recommend appropriate international action. Allow me also to pay a tribute to the outgoing president, Mr. Lusaka of Zambia, for the able and efficient manner in which he discharged his duties. His performance was a credit and inspiration to Africa. Only a few days ago the united Nations ceJebrated its fortieth anniversary. It was widely acknowledged that the United Nations has played a significant role in preventing a global conflict during the past 40 years. However, it should also be acknowledged, with great and grave concern, that the past 40 years have also witnessed an unprecedented stockpiling of sophisticated weapons capable of blowing into oblivion, at a touch of a button, not only the human race but also the planet Earth• Although in the past 40 years we have been spared a global conflict, during that period approximately 150 wars have been fought in almost every corner of the globe. There have been both just and unjust wars. As long as peoples anywhe~e on this planet are denied their inalienable right to self-determination and the right to choose their own socio-economic order without outside interference, they will justly revolt. It was the just revolt by such peoples and their eventual victory that greatly increased the membership of the United Nations and made it a truly representative body. However, on this the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations there still exist areas where the fundamental and inalienable right of self-determination is being blatantly denied to the rightful owners of countries. One such country is apartheid South Africa. Almost since the formation of the United Nations, the world body has consistently condemned apartheid and correctly b~anded it a crime against humanity. This principled stand by the overwhelming number of Members of the United Nations is both correct and highly commendable. However, mere condemnation, needless to say, is not an effective remedy for a problem. It is, in our view, only a step in making people conscious of the problem. Condemnation must be followed by positive action if the issue is to be moved from the realm of an academic or routine exercise. It is true that the international community has moved from mere condemnation to expressing strong revulsion against the apartheid regime. This expressed revulsion is not a reflection of mere moral apprehension, but a reaction to what is actually, currently, taking place inside apartheid South Africa. Since August and September last year some 780 Azanians have been killed, the great majority shot by the trigger-happy police of the racist, illegal regime. An average of 2.5 persons are being killed every day inside apartheid South Africa. The current state of affairs inside apartheid South Africa is not an unorganized spontaneous riot ~ irresponsible persons: it is the result of an inevitable development. The pan Africanist COngress of Azania (PAC), only 11 months after its organizational formation, dramatically changed and charted the course of the Azanian revolution. Our founding and first president, COmrade Mangaliso Robert Sobukwe, pointed out that to realize liberation the oppressed and dis,possessed people must first liberate themselves from mental oppression; they must regain their self-confidence as a people and thereafter assert their just and legitimate demands. This the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania achieved through the status campaign of Janu~ry 1960. It was this self-confidence that played the decisive role in the 21 March 1960 campaign that culminated in the massacre at Sharpevi:Lle. The enemy resorted to the use of reactionary violence against defenceless men, women and children precisely because the Azanian masses that responded to the call of the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania on 21 March 1960 were not meraly protesting against the obnoxious pass laws but, through that, were challenging the entire illegal status 3!!2. The PAC-led 21 March 1960 campaign shook and shocked the apartheid regime. It also aroused the international community. The political and economic consequences for the racist, illegal regime were enormous. Although some circles today are opposing the imposition of mandatory comprehensive sanctions against the white minority racist regime under the pretext that it would hurt the oppressed more than the oppressor, a study of that period will show that it was the western banks, particularly Chase Manhattan, that rescued the regime from total collapse and helped to perpetuate apartheid. The western bankers gave a kiss of life to the monster. The lessons drawn from the 21 March 1960 campaign proved invaluable to our people. It became abunda:eltly clear to our people that non-violence as a principal form of struggle was no answer to the problem; hence, the usherir~ in of armed struggle. This not only changed the course of the struggle but raised it to a higher stage and paved t.:he way for the current development. We often hear about those who abhor violence. Some even apologize for resorting to violence. To the Pan Afric~'ist Congress of Azania armed struggle is the only effective way to end, once and for all, the cycle of violence and institutionalized injustice in apartheid South Africa. This decision stems from an objective analysis of the situation. A surgeon does not apologize for performing surgery when that is the only and inevitable remedy. A people's struggle cannot develop and lead to its logical conclusion without the mobilization and politicization of the oppressed and dispossessed masses. Moreover, a political organization can succeed in mobilizing and politicizing the people only if it expounds and fights for the genuine aspirations of the oppressed and dispossessed majority. The 1976 nation-wide uprising, commonly known as the Soweto uprising, was the direct result of the mobilization and politicization campaign undertaken by the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania. This. is borne out by the fact that the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania and the Black Consciousness Movement were the only political organizations that were formally charged for the 16 June 1976 Soweto uprising in what has come to be known as the Bethal 18 secret trial. Comrade Zephania Mothopeng, the veteran leader of the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania, received a 30-year sentence for what the racist judge described as ·organizing and predicting" the 1976 Soweto uprising. If at Shar:Peville our people lost the fear of the enemy's prisons, at Soweto tbey lost the fear of the enemy's guns. Sharpeville and Soweto were impol'tant nileatcmes in toe hi.story of our people's legitimate struggle. Hence they are internationally cOBlDlemorated annually. Consequently, what is happening inside apartheid SOuth Africa today is the inevitable follow-up of the course that was charted by the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania through the 21 March 1960 and 16 June 1976 campaigns. Thepoliticization of our people has played a decisive role in their unequivocal rejection of cosmetic and deceptive reforms by the racist regime. The imposition of the so-called new constitution proved to be the catalyst for the current upsurge inside apartheid South Africa. The so-called new constitution aimed at dividing the oppressed and exploited masses ~ attempting to co-opt the so-called Coloureds arid people of Asian origin. The Pan Africanist Congress of Azania was the first mass-based political organization in South Africa to forge the principled political and organizational unity of all the oppressed people. It was, moreover, the first political organization to declare publicly that it stood for one race - the human race - and to open its membership to all, provided that those wanting to join owed their allegiance only to Africa, and accepted majority rule. The Pan Africanist Congress, because of its principled opposition to racism and ethnic superiority, has categorically stated from the very outset that it rejects the concept of group rights or interests. It is committed to guaranteeing individual rights. That position pf the Pan Africanist Congress was clearly and unambiguously enunciated in the documents and resolutions adopted at its inaugural conference on 6 April 1959. It was in response to the correct non-racial political line of the PAC that the so-called Coloureds and people of Asian origin overwhelmingly rejected the so-called new constitution. The opp~essed people not only rejected the so-called new constitution, which clearly entrenches white supremacy, but made certain that it is not implemented with the assistance of puppets. Today, the additional chambers created by the so-called new constitution are mere talking shops that are completely irrelevant to the course of development inside Azania. The oppressed and dispossessed masses of Azania, responding to the broad ideological line of the PAC, have rejected the entire system. Following the overwhelming boycott of the so-called new constitution by the so-called Coloureds and people of Asian origin, the African masses have also rejected the urban councils, the regime's instrument for perpetuating apartheid. In most townships, the urban councils have virtually or completely collapsed. It was, moreover, reported recently in the London GL!ardian that the regime was experiencing difficulties in finding or enticing people to serve on those puppet councils. The majority of those who previously served on those councils have resigned, but those who chose to defy the will of the masses were dealt with accordingly by the masses. Over the years, the regime had succeeded in recruiting agents from within the ranks of the oppressed. There were those who served the regime openly, in uniform, and there were those who joined its secret police. Those agents have been the targets of the masses during the past year. Many have been dealt with. Many are camping outside police stations, fearing to enter the townships and not being given ahelter by their masters in white areas. The result is the total collapse of the police and information-gathering infrastructure of the racist regime. That is why the arrest of leaders and open activists has had no effect this time on the scale and intensity of the resistance against the regime. The regime had declared a state of emergency in some 36 areas. Last week it claimed to have lifted the emergency in some six areas, only to announce soon after that it was introducing a state of emergency in s~veral more areas. The regime has neither administrative nor military control over those areas. The regime's army and paramilitary police force can only enter those areas in large numbers during daylight, and they invariably clash with residents. They are thereafter compelled to retreat to safer ground. Struggles are being waged simultaneously on several fronts. The students have been on strike against the inferior Bantu education system since 11 June 1976. At present, some 250,000 students are on strike, ranging from primary school to university level. It must be noted that the students are not seeking reform of the educational system but rather the total elimination of apartheid. Since the beginning of this decade the workers inside apartheid South Africa have been unionized in large numbers. The unions in turn are fighting for recognition and the right to collective bargaining. They are correctly resisting establishment control and supervision. The number of strikes and work stoppages has been increasing every year. The mineworkers union has lately emerged as a powerful force within the labour ranks. The mine owners in apartheid South Africa, such as Anglo-American and De Beers, have been among the most vicious exploiters of black labour. Not only have they blatantly exploited black labour, but they have also implemented grossly discriminatory practices. For instance, they pay a black miner only SUS 125 per month, while a white miner receives SUS 660. A white miner, besides other benefits and privileges, is entitled to compensation of SUS 7,700 if affected by a work-related disease and an additional SUS 3,800 if that illness is serious. The African miner is only entitled to SUS 640. The workers struggle is bound to develop further in the months to come and the majority o~ workers are cognizant of the fact that their ultimate salvation lies with national liberation. Moreover, the regime has had to suspend partially the forced removal of Africans from their ancestral lands or areas designated as white by the regime. It was the firm resistance of those affected that compelled the racist regime to opt for suspension. However, having fai.led to remove the population from Crossroads by bulldozers, the regime is now attempting to remove them by deliberately starting fires. The bantustan policy of the regime has failed. It had hoped to denationalize the African population and make them appendages of one or another of the bantustans. The United Nations has played an important role in ensuring that those puppet entities are not given international recognition. While not a single united Nations Member has extended formal recognition, some - in particular, Israel - have established clandestine political and economic ties with those puppet bantustans. We call upon the international community to investigate this, for any contact with, support for or investment in those bantustans is in violation of United Nations General Assembly and relevant Security Council resolutions. The first question a serious and genuine liberation movement must honestly answer is this: Who must constitute the vehicle for genuine change in apartheid South Africa, the oppressive regime or the oppressed and dispossessed majority? The Pan Africanist Congress of Azania, at its inaugural congress, answered this vital question: it can only be the oppressed and dispossessed people of Azania. This is an objective fact. Moreover, from this political decision must flow the method of struggle and the strategy to be adopted. The strategy, therefore, must be to develop and intensify the fighting capacity of the people. Any objective observer of our struggle will note that every campaign launched by the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania is basically and consciously aimed at increasing the fighting capacity of our people, both ideologically and materially. We of the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania, through bitter experience, have long come to the conclusion that our struggle must be internally based and that in the final analysis we are our own liberators. The international community can condemn apartheid, but we are the ones that must finally liquidate that inhuman system. Moreover, we must not shirk this sacred responsibility. The South African racist regime has been waging a war of aggression and destabilization against the front-line and neighbouring States. The racist army of the regime, emulating its zionist counter-part in the Middle East, has carried out repeated attacks against Lesotho, Mozambique, Angola, Botswana and Zimbabwe under the familiar pretext of attacking bases of national liberation movements. The victims in all these attacks have been innocent refugees or nationals of those countries. Nor have these attacks in any way stemmed the tide of resistance inside apartheid South Africa. On the contrary, the resistance has intensified with each passing day. The problem in southern Africa is not the political position adopted by the front-line and neighbouring States, because their position is in keeping with their universal condemnation of this evil system repeatedly voiced in this very Hal\. They grant asylum to refugees under international obligations. The sole cause of all the problems in southern Africa, therefore, is the universally discledited policies and practices of the apartheid regime. For peace to triumph, that regime must be totally eliminated. We call upon the international community to give maximum financial and material support to the front-line and neighbouring States in withstanding ~partheid South Africa's military aggression and economic destabilization. While we acknowledge the fact that we are, in the final analysis, our own liberators, we value tremendously international understanding and support. The support rendered by th~ international community complements our internally based struggle. However, our people wQuld like to see the international community progress f~om condemnation to effective action. The founding fathers of this Organization included in its Charter a provision for indicating how to respond to a regime whose policies are contrary to the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The apartheid regime is unique on this planet in the institutionalized violation of every tenet of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Moreover, it has deliberately chosen to defy repeated calls by the international community to abandon the evil policy of !f~rtheid. Internally, it has intensified repression. If there were ever a regime against which the prOVisions of Chapter VII of the Charter should long ago have been applied, it t~ the illegal minority racist regime of apartheid South Africa. In fact, this is an indictment of those Members of the United Nations that have successfully blocked the imposition against the apartheid regime of comprehensive mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the United Nations (Mr. Mlambo, PAC) Charter. The principal cUlprits have been the United States, Britain, France and the 'Feaeral Republic of Germany. Some of them have claimed that they are opposed to sanctions because they would hurt the oppressed more than the oppressor. If our people, unarmed, are prepared daily to face the enemy's guns and daily to bury compatriots, why should they not be prepared to endure further economic hardship - if there is anything further left to endure. The refusal by those countries to impose comprehensive mandatory economic sanctions is seen by our people as active connivance in the perpetuation of apartheid and the prolonging of our sufferings. We most strongly condemn the position adopted by those countries and call upon their peoples to use all the means at their disposal to compel their respective Governments to desist forthwith from conniving with apartheid and join the international community to bring about the speedy and total elimination of apartheid. We urge them to act and to act now. In some circles there is talk of promoting dialogue with the racist regime. If it were possible to resolve this conflict through dialogue, our people would long ago have opted for that path. But experience has taught them otherwise. No oppressor has abdicated through moral persuation. An oppressor will abdicate only when the situation on the ground beco~es untenable. Our imme~Jate task, therefore, must be to make the oppressor's position untenable and then to negotiate from a position of parity or of strength. The South African regime has repeatedly shown itself to be aggressive and intransigent. It is also dishonest. Even accords it forced some neighbouring countries to sign it has failed to honour and respect. Moreover, if the racist regime refuses to leave a Territory which it illegally occupies, namely Namibia, what substantial and meaningful concession will the regime make in South Africa? For the past four decades our people ha looked to the United Nations for international support. In many respects, that support has been forthcoming. In 1963 I was ~entenced to 20 years' imprisonment and served the full 20 years on Robben Island. It was a similar debate in 1964 that exposed internationally the plight ·of political prisoners on infamouS ~bben Island. (Hr. Mlambo, PAC) I was one of those specifically mentioned as being buried alive up to my neck and urinated upon by the sadist white warders. Exposure of that information before this forum led to a slight improvement in prison conditions. The call for the release of political prisoners such as comrades Zephania Mothopeng, Nelson Mandela and others has assisted in highlighting our just cause and in encouraging both Mothopeng and Mandela to reject the so-called amnesty or conditional release offered earlier this year. However, I have to inform this Assembly that two of the longest-serving life political prisoners on Robben Island, comrades Jeff Masemola and John Nkosi, are members of the Pan Africanl~ Congress of Azania. They too were offered the so-called amnesty but rejected it with the contempt it deserved. In conclusion, I take this opportunity to thank most sincerely those countries, organizations and individuals that have consistently supported us. We also want to thank the Secretary-General of ~he united Nations moat sincerely for his concern and commitment regarding the question of apartheid. Our heartfelt thanks also go to the Special Committee against Apartheid and its dynamic and committed Chairman, Mr. Joseph Garba. We also wish to thank the centre against Apartheid and its Director, Mr. Iqbal Akhund, and all his staff. We of the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania declared the 1980s the decade of the Azanian revolution. This important appointment with history we are determined to keep. Mr. VRAALSEN (Norway): Since the General Assembly last met to discuss apartheid one year ago the situation in South Africa has gone from tense to explosive. Every day brings more news of violence, arrests and riots in a rising spiral of confrontation. More than 770 people are known to have died since the upheaval began in September last year. As this debate takes place, hundreds of the political opponents of the SOuth African Government are detained. I need not at this point give a detailed account of the tragic developments in South Africa over the past year. The facts are known and, furthermore, it is sufficient for me to refer to the comprehensive and important statement made at the opening of the debate today ~ my good friend and colleague, the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid, ME. Joseph Garba. However, there is one point which I should like to make and that is the following. Let there be ~o doubt that the responsibility for the tragic developments in South Africa rests with that country's white rulers and with nobody else. South Africa is the only country that has made race the touchstone of political rights. This system violates the most fundamental concepts of human liberty and equality. Apartheid cannot be reformedJ it must be abolished. The constant source of tension that the apartheid policy constitutes in the region of southern Africa is another reason why something needs to be done urgently in order to dismantle this inhuman system. Despite universal condemnation, the South African Government has so far. refused to take concrete ana meaningful steps towards ending its racist policy. The constitutional and legal reforms that the South African Government has introduced recently are mainly cosmetic. They are designed to restructure the apartheid system while maintaining white political control. There have been no - I repeat, no - clear indications on the part of the South African Gover~ment that it is willing to grant the black majority its legitimate political rights. Lack of genuine reforms will only provoke further bloodshed in South Africa. The black people of South Africa are now rising up in protest against aparthe~d. The state of emergency has recently been extended to the Cape Town area and violence has begun to affect even white areas of the country. An unprecedented (Mr. Vraal~en, Norway) wave of resistance is sweeping across that troubled land. The liberation movements, the United Democratic Front, the black Churches and the independent black trade union movement are all playing an important role in this intensified stru9gle against apartheid. Widespread arrests and detentions will not succeed in putting a stop to this unrest. The. Government of South Africa has to recognize that the present agony of the country signals an e~ to apartheid, once and for all. The South African Government is now confronted with a choice: either to let the situation continue to deteriorate and develop into a catastrophic race war or to address the fundamental problems of that divided nation. The time han come for a clear commitment to genuine power-sharing and a willingness to release all political prisoners and start talking to the true representatives of the black majority. Steps like these would begin to answer the concerns of the international community. The South African authorities have themselves described South Africa as a microcosm of the world. In this world of ours, the practice of race supremacy is not only morally wrong but also represents a threat to international peace and security. During this anniversary session we have registered ~he serious concern of Member States over the issue of apartheid and the willingness of Governments to act on their own to bring pressure to bear on SOuth Africa. We all have a responsibility to try to assist the South African nation in avoiding a further escalation of the conflict.* * Mr. Makeka (Lesotho), Vice-President, took the Chair. The United Nations Security Council has so far failed to agree on mandatory sanctions against South Africa under Chapter VII of the Charter, with the exception of the arms embargo of 1977. Norway has repeatedly advocated comprehensive mandatory sanctions and stands ready to implement such measures. The absence of comprehensive sanctions should not be used as a pretext for failing to act unilaterally or together with other nations. Norway and the other Nordic countries have adopted.a number of unilateral measures in order to increase the pressure on South Africa to abolish apartheid. In 1978 the Nordic countries adopted a joint programme of action. Some ten days ago the Foreign Ministers of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Sweden and my own country met in Oslo and agreed on a revised and extended Nordic programme of action against South Africa. The programme contains the following elements: recommendations to Nordic enterprises which export to or import from South Africa to seek other markets and suppliers with a view to reducing trade between the Nordic countries and SOuth Africa; prohibition or discouragement of new Nordic investments in SOuth Africa, granting of loans, including international loans, to South Africa, leasing to enterprises in South Afri~a and transfer of patents and manufacturing licences to South Africa; measures to prevent government procurement from South Africa; and increased Nordic humanitarian assistance to refugees and liberation movements, as well as to victims and opponents of apartheid, and increased assistance to the front-line States, to other countries of the Southern African Developmant Co-ordination Conference (SADCC) and to the SADCC co-operation, in order to reduce the dependence of those countries on South Africa and thus increase their ability to withstand South Africa's policy of destabilization. The new and extended Nordic programme of action against South Africa, adopted in Oslo 18 October, has been circulated as a United Nations document under this item of the agenda (A/40/754). In addition to the Oslo programme on Nordic measures against SOuth Africa, in order to reduce further Norway's trade and other economic relations with SOuth Africa, and I am pleased to report that this plan has already resulted in . . substantially reduced imports from SOuth Africa. In recent months many countries have introduced various measures against South :i Africa. Norway welcomes those actions and we urge other countries to implement similar measures. However, we shall continue to advocate comprehensive mandatory sanctions b¥ the Security Council against SOuth Africa. Although economic sanctions might not eliminate apartheid, they could in our view contribute to that end. They demonstrate resolve and moral outrage, and this would undoubtedly have psychological and political effects on South Africa. The winds of change are sweeping across SOuth Africa. We are approaching the end of an era of racial segregation and minority rule. Change is inevitable. As time is running out, we urgently appeal to the SOuth African Government to announce a timetable for fundamental political changes in order to do away with apartheid without further bloodshed. Mr. IBRAHIM (Indonesia): While the attention of the world is focused on this year's historic session of the General Assembly, the SOuth African conflict is at the same time one of the greatest preoccupations of the United Nations. Seven times during this year alone the Security Council has been convened to take up, first, South Africa's racist tyranny, then its continued colonial domination of Namibia, followed by its military attacks against Angola and Botswana and subsequently again to confront the conflict in South Africa and renewed aggressions against Angola. The resultant eight Security Council resolutions this year - 560 (1985) of March, 566 (1985) and 567 (1985) of June, 569 (1985) of August, 571 (1985) and 572 (1985) of September and 574 (1985) of OCtober - underscore the fact that at the root of the dangerous worsening of the long, grave and menacing situation in South Africa is none other than the system of apartheid. Moreover, in the context of the solemn commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the united Nations, held just last week, the obdurate refusal by South Africa to comply with those and all other relevant decisions of the Organization poses an unprecedented challenge not only-to the credibility of the United Nations but also to the sanctity of the Charter itself. Indeed, the United Nations first became seized of the question of racial discrimination in South Africa at its very first session in 1946. Since then apartheid has been proclaimed as a crime against humanity and a threat to international peace and security and for over two decades the Special Committee against Apartheid has directed a sustained mobilization of the international community to eliminate apartheid in any and all of its manifestations. Truly, our Organization - and everyone of us - is duty bound by a solemn obligation to the oppressed people of South Africa to eradicate once and for all this blot on the conscience of mankind. The unparalleled dimen~ions of the conflict in South Africa and the region as a whole cannot be divorced ftom the endless chain of atrocities perpetrated by racist South Africa. In fact, lest July, when the state of emergency was invoked, was not the first time that the racist regime had gone to such lengths to sustain the apartheid system. Twenty-five years ago Pretoria also conferred upon itself the same arbitrary powers in the wake of its massacre of innocent black protestors in Sharpeville, and it is time to state squarely that what has really been invoked is not a state of emergency per se but in reality a state of siege, the like of which we have not yet witnessed in the long and barbaric history of the regime's repression and violence. Indeed, oveJ:' the course of tbe past year not a single day has gone by without further reports of acts of repress!on and more killings of defenceless opponents of apartheid, now reported to have reached the ~taggering number of nearly 1,000; of the arrest o~ scoreS of leaders of black political movements, church and community groups and their being charged with high treason; of the thousands ofinnoc:ent men, women aJ1!:l children being dragged off into indefinite detention, some never to be heard of again" Their plight is of serious concern to all of us, as is the incarceration of Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners who personify the ~Qutageou$ struggle of Black South Africa under the leadership of their national liberatior~ movements. And it is with sorrow and indignation that my delegation has learned of the execution of a valiant South African patriot, Malesela Benjamin Moloise, de~ite international apP.eals for his life. We extend our condolences to his bereaved family as we do also to all the families of those who have paid the supreme price, be it on the gallows behind prison walls or on the streets or in the countryside of their beloved land. The selflessness, the heroism, the daily martyrdom of so many sons and daughters of South Africa attest tG the fact that the rage of the people can no longer be contained and that the situation can aptly be described as on the verge of an all-out civil war. We could go on with this gruesome portrayal of the regime's barbarous policy against the Black majority, such as bantustanization, forced population removals, influx controls and so on. However, given the urgency of the critical situation, our immediate attention must be focused on the actions of the racist regime that have brought on this extreme crisis and, most importantly, what steps the international community must immediately take to terminate the intolerable carnage. While the acute situation can be directly attributed to the practice of apartheid promulgated into law 37 years ago, it should be recalled that the dire circumstances today engulfing South Africa were precipitated by the Pretoria regime's implementation of the constitutional fraud last year. Despite Security Council resolution 554 (1984) forewarning that such a nefarious scheme would result in greater strife and turmoil, the regime none the less, in its customary reliance on terror and intimidation backed by massive military force, felt secure in its delusion of being able to force the oppressed majority into accepting its fait accompli. The spontaneous and sustained outburst of protest belie Pretoria's self-assuredness. Millions of workers and students confronted the mobilization of the cOlllbined SOuth African military and pOlice forces. And as the racist regi~e proved itself to possess neither the policy nor the capability for progressive change, and that short of brute force it was politically bankrupt, the rebellion spread across the whole country engulfing Sharpl~ville, Tembisa, Sebokeng, Soweto and beyond. Neither this massive united resistance that continued into 1985 nor the eXho~tations of the Security Council in resolution 560 (1985) could move the racist regime to relent. Rather than responding positively to the overwhelming will of the international community, the regime instead moved to impose the draconian state of emergency in 36 districts, and has now extended it to eight more, including Cape Town, a glaring reaffirmation of the regime's growing paralysis. Paced with this merciless onslaught by Pretoria's State terror apparatus, Member States welcomed the decision of the Security Council urging, for the first time, imposition of specific aconemic sanctions against the racist regime as set forth in its resolution 569 (1985). While we are heartened by the steps taken in this regard by some Western countries, at the same time we regret that the major trading partners of South Africa have ostensibly confined themselves to symbolic gestures, falling short of even the restricted nature of resolution 569 (1985). Yet even these limited sar~tions have proved that South Africa can be made to pay an economic price for its defiance. We believe none the less that the economic difficulties of the Pretoria regime caused by apprehension in Western financial circles is due as much to the widespread unrest in the country as it is to these voluntary and circumscribed actions. In this context I should like to refer to thf) statement of my Foreign Minister in the general debate: "South Africa's stubborn flouting of all accepted norms of international law and civilized behaviour and the dismal failure of the policy of so-called r constructive engagement have long since convinced my Government that nothing exhortations and appeals, numerous condemnations and warnings and various efforts at constructive dialogue have a~l failed. What is urgently needed is to seize the opportunity by going further in our determination to place the full weight and authority of the United Nations behind the struggle of the oppressed people of South Africa and by building on the recognition of world pUblic opinion, particularly in certain Western countries, of the need for meaningful economic sanctions. It is therefore imperative to implement a comprehensive and concerted strategy by resolutely invoking the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter. At the same time, we should intensify the international campaign for all States to sever all relations with the racist regime. We should strengthen the arms embargo in accordance with the report of the Security Council Committee established in pursuance of resolution 421 (1977), as well as the oil embargo, including all strategic supplies and -dual-purpose- equipment. Together we should actively seek to apply additional voluntary measures of boycott or embargo against South Africa while ensuring stricter adherence to the existing measures. Efforts should be mobilized to step up practical support for the struggle of the oppressed people of South Africa under the leadership of their national liberation movements. In this context as well, increased aid should be extended to the front-line States, which are fulfilling an indispensable role in the struggle. For more than a century Africa has struggled relentlessly to liberate itself from colonial an~ racist domination. It has been a long and often bitter struggle, but today close to 500 million people on this continent have freed themselves from independence and for a non-racial, democratic society in South Africa is part of ~he wider struggle for the liberation of the entire continent of Africa and for total African freedom. Indeed, it is a struggle of all humanity to eradicate colonialism and apartheid, the most demeaning forms of human exploitation and degradation. We are fUlly convinced that the people of Namibia and South Africa will soon regain their birthright of freedom and justice and that the question is only whether it will be ushered in by an act of collective wisdom, keen foresight and sense of justice, or in the wake of further even more intense upheaval, senseless bloodshed and confrontation. There is also no dOUbt that the opportunity for a rational choice between these alternatives is fast running out on us. Hr. PHI!=IPPE (Luxembourg) (interpretation from French) : The 10 States member,l3 of the European CODllIunity, Spain and Portugal, on whose behalf I have the honour to speak~ ha~e consistently, unreservedly and unequivocally condemned the apartheid regime in South Africa. Apartheid deprives the majority of the peqP.le of South Africa of freedom of expression and prevents them from participating in the political life and government of their country. As an institutionalized system of State racism, apartheid is an insult to the dignity of those it affects and a flagrant violation of the human rights and fundamental freedoms set out in the United Nations Charter and in the Universal Decla~ation of Human Rights, for the benefit of all without exception. The efforts of the non-white population to secure an end to these inadmissible practices and the abolition of the present system have been fought by the South African authorities and this has led to the escalation of violence and repression, which in recent months have reached new hdights. In that connection, it is pacticularly deplorable that Pretoria refused to heed the a,ppeals for clemency for Benjamin Moloise that came from all over the world, including the countries members of the European Community, Spain and Portugal. The ensuing violence in Johannesburg in an atmosphere of rioting provided unfortunate proof of this. The Ten, Spain and Portugal wish to recall that their goal is, quite simply, the elimination of apartheid. That system must be abolisheo. For years, we have collectively and individually urged the adoption of constitutional changes to prevent violence from becomirlg a commonplace of di'iily life in south Africa. The serious incidents of recent months have confirmed that our anxiety was well founded. If the Pcetoria authorities wish to avoid a general flare-up of the situation they must undertake as q~,ickly as possible constitutional reforms leading to the actual elimination of apartheid and the granting of political &nd civil rights to the entire population without exception. In this context, the Ten, Spain and Portugal urge the Government of South Africa to translate its recent declarations of intent into practical measures. More and more voices from within the white community are calling for the dismantling of the system of racial discrimination. In the view of the Ten, Spain and portugal, the primary necessity is the commencement of a dialogue between the present south African Government and the authentic representatives of the non-white cODlIlunity. Unfortunately, the South African Government continues to reject these legitimate demands and has demonstrated its infle~ibility by proclaiming a state of emergency in several areas and launching a wave of repression which in one year has already claim~' hundreds of victims. The Ten, Spain and Portugal condemn the use of violence, whatever its source. In South Africa, violence is inherent in the syst~m of apartheid and affects partic~larly the black population. The Ten, Spain and Portugal reiterate their belief that only a political, peaceful solution will make it possible to create a climate of stability and to ensure the prosperity of all the inhabitants of the country. The efforts of the international community must be directed towards that end. For that purpose, it is essential that channels of communication with South Africa remain open. For their part, the Ten, Spain and Portugal will continue to bring pressure to bear on the Government of that country, in order to promote the process of peaceful change in South Africa. The declaration of a state of emergency marked a particularly serious deterioration of the situation. The Ten, Spain and portugal have called for the immediate lifting of the state of emergency. With the aim of contributing to the achievement of that goal and to the abolition of apartheid, the Ten, Spain and Portugal decided to despatch to South Africa the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Italy and a member of the European Commission to make known their views on the serious developments in that country. The message carried by that delegation stressed with the greatest firmness the need for the expeditious initiation of a dialogue between the South African Government and the authentic representatives of the majority of the population. Since any dialogue requires a minimum of trust, the representatives of the European Community called upon South Africa to lay the foundations for that trust by freeing forthwith and unconditionally Hr. Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners, inclUding those detained under the state of emergency, ending the practice of detention without trial, abandoning the forced displacement of populations, and repealing discriminatory legislation. Clearly, in the view of the European Community, that dialogue must lead to the rapid, complete dismantling of the inhuman system of apartheid. To make South Africa recognize that necessity, the international community must continue to bring pressure to bear to compel South Africa to embark on this course. The States members of the European Community, Spain and Portugal have decided to use their collective weight to that end. Thus, on 10 September in Luxembourg, they adopted the following series of measures, which are now being implemented: a strictly monitored e~argo on the export to South Africa of weapons and paramilitary equipment~ a strictly monitored eMbargo on the import from South Africa of weapons and paramilitary equipmentJ rejection of all co-operation in the military field~ the recalling of military attaches from the RepUblic of South Africa and the refusal to accredit military attaches of the Republic of South AfricaJ discouragement of cultural and scientific agreements except where these will contribute to the elimination of apartheid or will not support that systemJ a freeze on official contacts and international agreements in the fields of sport and securitYJ the elimination of oil exports to the Republic of South AfricaJ the (Hr. Philippe, Luxembourg) eliJIination of exports of sensitive equipaent intended for the sout:hAfrican army and police; and a ban on all new co-operation in the nuclear field. But the European Community has not stopped at the adoption of restrictive measures. Political, trade union, management, cultural, scientific and sporting contacts with the non-white community will be stepped up. In this connection, I should mention again the various contacts that the ministerial mission had during its visit to South Africa with representatives of the non-white community, inoluding influential Church figures. The Minister for Foreign Affairs of Luxembourg, moreover, met in Luxembourg with representatives of the Afrioan National Congress of South Africa (ANe). Mo~eover, the European Community has adopted measures of active support for non-violent anti-apartheid organizations and assistance programmes will be carried out in the field of the education of the non-white population. (Mr. Philippe, Luxembourg) A programme of assistance to the ~untries of the south African Devalopsent Co-operation Conference (SADCC) and the front-line countries has also be~n decided upon. In this respect it is fitting to recall that for several year.s now the European Community has allocated considerable financial assistanc~ to the victiRS of apartheid, as well. as to the SADCC countries. The latter receive" inter ~lia. development assistance within the framework of the second Lome Comjl'~r.'ition and food assistance. Thus in the past few years they have received apprv/d~:ately $1 billion a year under co-operation with the European Community and under bilateral co-operation with its member States. Similarly, as soon as the third Lame Convention enters into force between the European Community and the countries of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group (ACP) at the beginnlng of next year, that financial assistance will be continued. The Ten, Spain and Portugal will continue very closely to monitor developments in South Africa. The question of adopting other measures, inclUding sanctions, remains on the agenda. Our commitment to the promotion of justice and peace and to the protection of the human person in South Africa did not emerge following the recent deterioration of the situation in that country, as can be seen from the strict application of Security Council resolution 418 (1977) since its adoption. Similarly, since 1977 the European Community has adopted a Code of Conduct for companies having branches, offices or representatives in South Africa, thereby demonstrating our determination to translate into facts our principles and our convictions. The Code spells out the objectives and incicates the ways and means by which companies can contribute to the process of the elimination of apartheid. It aims to promote substantial improvements in the living and working conditions of as large a number as possible of African workers and the elimination of any form of (Hr. Phi1ippe, Luxeilt',ourg) racial discrimination or other effects of the apartheid systea at the enterprise level. The Code lays particular emphasis 011 trade union rights, training and education. In spite of the role this Code has already played in promoting the social condition of African workers with regard to salaries, interracial relations, training and desegregation in general, we have decided recently further to strengthen its provisions, in view of developments in social legislation in South Africa since 1977. The Ten member States of the European Community and Spain and Portugal will continue to lend their assistance to the entire international community in order to work resolutely for the establishment in South Africa of a free and democratic society, free from racial oppression. There is no time to lose, for the more the South African Government delays in granting a majority of its citizens the right to participate in the government of their own country, the more difficult it will be to achieve change by peacefUl means. Hr. BARNET'T (Jamaica): We have recently concluded the formal events to observe the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations. The year 1986 will mark as well 40 years since the General Assembly first began:to consider the problem of r~cism in SOuth Africa. Shall we be able, in 1986, to mark the dismemberment of the system of apartheid? During the past four weeks we have been reminded of the many notable achievements of this Organization. Particular emphasis has been placed on international peace and security, human rights and fundamental freedoms, decolonization and the efforts to achieve social and economic progress for all peoples. Much bas been done. But the policies of apartheid of tbe Government of SOuth Africa remain with us. In his report on the work of the Organizatin for 1985, the Secretary-General of the United Nations noted that racial discrimination represented the most dangero.us of soci,al and political poisons, which should have no place in any form in our society. Be further observed t~at in one particular and extreme instance, the policy Of apartheid in South Africa, the unwillingp'ess to undertake timely remedial measures produced an ominous and violent situation on which the Security Council had recently pronounced itself. He also expressed the hope that even at this late hour steps could be taken and contacts established to avert the worst. It is useful to remind ourselves that white South Africans share the racial assumptions prevalent among whites everywhere during the first half of the twentieth century and beyond. Around 1905 Lord Milner, the British High Commissioner and Governor of the conquered Territories in South Africa, had put it quite clearly when he said that -A political equality of white and black is impossible. The white man must rule, because he is elevated by many, many steps above the black man.- The process of decolonization has not entirely destroyed that assumption. To it we owe at least in part the resistance to the sternest measures against the apartheid regime of South Africa. Apartheid is imbued with the myth of racial SUPeriority - and more. Before the Second World War Louis Botha, Jan Srouts and James Hertzog appeared to lack precise comprehensive approaches to their racial question, but their p~tchwork policies had unifying objectives: to provide whites with cheap black labour; to ensure continued political and economic domination of blacks by whites; to confine to reservations Africans whose labour whites did not need. (Mr. Barnett, Jamaica) In 1945 Professor Cronje - a South African - wrote: "The racial policy which we 48 Afrikaners should proJllOte must be directed to the preservation of racial and cultural variety. This is because it is according to the will of God, and also because with the knowledge at our disposal it can be justified on practical grounds... The more consistently the. policy of apartheid could be applied, the greater would be the security for the purity of our blood and the surer our unadulterated European racial survival•.,. Total racial separation... is the IllOst consistent applicatin of the Afrikaner idea of racial apartheid.- Those are the bases of the grand apartheid built by Malan, Verwoerd, Vorster, Botha an~ company. ... Therefore, while we fervently cling to the hopes expressed by our Secretary-General, we fear that the worst may already be tAt hand. In confronting the massive resistance and widespread opposition to its apartheid policies, the Pretoria regime has sought recourse to the most violent and repressive tactics against the internal opposition forces. As we have hear~, over the past ~4 months the media reports indicate that some 760 people have been killed, including innocent women.~nd children. Thousands of others have been arrested, detained and imprisoned, including the leaders of the main opposition forces. With each passing day we see and hear of more shootings and killings as the cycle of violence extends to more and more South African townships. In the face of mounting attacks on the structure of the apartheid system the Pretoria regime has remained truculent and brazenly defiant of the appeals and demn~.ds of the international community. Nowhere has this been more evident than in its callou~ indifference to the pleas of the leaders of the interntional community, including our Secretary-General and the President of the General Assembly, to commute the death sentence ~mposed on Benjamin Moloise. It has also ignored the calls made for the immedi~te release of Nelson Mandela and other opposition leaders who have been imprisoned for no other reason than their unflinching opposition to apartheid. Today we have been inspired by the brilliant address given by an outstanding SOuth African, Bishop Desmond Tutu, whom we warmly welcome to the General Assembly. His presence honours us. He is vivid testimony to the fact that, despite their travails, the indominitable spirit of the valiant freedom fighters remains undaunted. In his statement at the commemorative session of the General Assembly, the Prime Minister of Jamaica, the Right Honourable Edward Seaga, stated, inter alia: 8The collective conscience of the world has long expressed outrage and disgust at South Africa's system of apartheid. The cry f?r freedom for the tortured soul of that country has not gone unheeded. The call for concrete action has been loud from the developing nations and some others. Now, the black people of South Africa, humiliated and degraded for decades by a system which was obviously impervious to verbal assault, are taking matters into their own hands. They are attacking the citadel of apartheid with their own bodies and the bodies of their children, some only a few years old.- (A/40/PV.34, p. 41) While Pretoria has stepped up its repression at home, it has also intensified its armed and unprovoked aggression against neighbouring countries in the region. During this year alone, it has carried out military attacks against Botswana and has so far conducted three military raids against Angolan territQry, with the last t~o raids taking place in quick succession during the month of September 1985. And what has been the response of the international community? While we note that there are encouraging signs and a more favourable disposition among the Western countries to apply limited and selective economic sanctions against Pretoria, it is our view that the response of the internatio~al community to South Africa's defiance and aggressions has been far too timid and equivocal. We fear that it is precisely this lack of resolute action which has so far emboldened the Pretoria regime to remain intransigent to the demands of the international community for an immediate and total end to apartheid In addition, the Pretoria regime has also stubbornly resisted the demands for the establishment of a genuine and democratic system of government in that country based on majority rule and equal rights for all citizens. Since the beginning of 1985 the Security Council has met in urgent session on some seven occasions to consider the consequences of South Africa's actions in the region. On each occasion it has adopted resolutions condemning the Pretoria regime for its acts of internal repression and also called upon it to desist from its acts of unprovoked aggression against the territories of front-line States. Given the'situation existing in South Africa, there is real need for far more urgent and effective action by the international community in order to prevent further bloodshed and to avert the possibility of an open racial conflagration in the region. Jamaica has already indicated its firm support for mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa and, in the event that these measures are not effective, for comprehensive sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter. At their recent summit meeting in Nassau, the Commonwealth leaders adopted a compromise package of selective economic measures against South Africa. The Commonwealth leaders have also given South Africa clear warning that if meaningful action is not taken to terminate the existing state of emergency, to dismantle the system of apartheid and to ~stablish political freedom in that country, then, at the end of six months, they will consider further action to be taken. What is now needed is a closer co-ordination of efforts ~ the international community to ensure that a full range of measures is rigorously applied. In addition to the application of economic sanctions, Jamaica also considers it necessary for the international community to strengthen the cultural and sports boycott of South Africa. The Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against Apartheid in Sports has presented his report, which contains the final version of the draft convention, which he has presented to the General Assembly for adoption at the fortieth session. As Rapporteur of the Working Group (Mr. Ba~nett, Jamaica) of the Ad Hoc ca..ittee entrusted with the responsibility for preparing the draft Convention, Jamaica bas participated actively in the Committee,ls work. It is now for the General Assembly as a whole to take action on the draft Convention, the adoption of whic\1 could contribute effectively in applying additional pressure on SOuth Africa. The painful process of national liberation in South Africa has now entered its final chapter. From Sharpeville in 1960 to Soweto in 1976 to Cross Roads in 1985, the process of national liberation in South Africa has now entered a stage in which the level and intensity of mass resistance has considerably widened to encompass virtually every township and village all over South Africa. The discredited system of apartheid is doomed. Jamaica will continue to maintain a firm and unwavering position in speaking out against this evil system and in assisting the international campaign for the total elimination of apartheid and racism. We recognize, however, that the elimination of apartheid in itself will not autoaatically mean an end to the practice of racial discrimination. The final eradication of this abhorrent and inhumane system ~uld be a major victory. But let there be no mistake that we can thereby take for granted the elimination of notions of racial superiority. The fight to ensure universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all peoples without regard or distinction as to race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin will have to continue. Mr. ~ENIJI (Nigeria): The debate on the policiea of apartheid of the Government of South Africa begins this year in very special circumstances. The oppressed peoples of South Africa, having patiently endured the humiliation of apartheid imposed on them by the most repressive governmental machinery the world has ever known, are in the midst of a determined resistance. Not even the most brutal use o~ armed forces has dampened their determination. The black people of South Africa are sending us unmistakable signals of the countdown to the bloodbath '. which many speakers in this Assembly have predicted in the past. So far the sacrifice has been concentrated on the black people. It is they who are being killed daily while peacefully protesting. It is their children, cften as young as six, who are being shot in the back by trigger-happy policemen. But let us not presume that the one-sided loss of innocent lives will continue indefinitely. Those who have been pushed against the wall are bound to fight back. Sooner rather than later ~hites in south Africa as well will begin to lose their lives in great numbers. Perhaps then the conscience of the Western world will be aroused. Perhaps then the united Nations will be permitted to adopt the only effective measure lett to it to put a quick end to apartheid. Must we wait until sucb a catastrophe has occurred? The Special Committee against Apartheid, whose annual report has been so ably presented by its Rapporteur, has served as an early warning mechanism of the united Nations on the situation in south Africa. Its latest report calls attention to a crisis situation which, if not urgently and effectively dealt with, will certainly lead to the bloodbath which many representatives have mentioned. The facts of the situation today speak for themselves. Every day, press reports, indidivudal testimonies, confessions by medical practitioners who can no longer mentally bear their wicked violation of medical ethics, and television reports bring to us the living hell that the Pretoria regime has made ofSo~t~ Africa for the non~whites. The sca1eof the torture, the extent of the statu t~!~orism of the Pretoria regime, can no longer be los~ on the inte~national community. The litany of abuses and the evil orchestration of Pretoria's plans have shocked even the most coneistent Western collaborators with the apartheid Government. The raciscregime has suddenly unleashed the armr and Police on its own people, the majority population of that country. It has engaged in mass detention, arrests, killing v victimization and the sanctioning of official death squads. TQe count of the dead among the non-whites, particularly tha blacks, has become a daily ritual in South Africa. These facts are well known to all of us. They have been further documented in the heart-rending report of the Special Committee. While my delegation commends the Special Committee for its efforts in maintaining an irreversible international opposition to apartheid, we must stress that a lot still needs to be done. It is the view of my delegation that the time for positive, effective and decisive action has come; the time when rhetorical condemnation of apartheid should be matched by vigorous and effective measures against racist South Africa. We welcome the action by individual Governments, but we have to recall also that the General Assembly, as far back as its thirtieth session, had proclaimed that -the United Nations and the international community have a special responsibility towards the oppressed people of South Africa and their liberation movements, and towards those imprisoned, restLicted, or exi~ed for their struggle against apartheid-. (resolution 3411 C (XXX), para. 1) It is in this connection, therefore, that my Government strongly recommends that the United Nations affirm its determination to devote increasing attention Rnd all necessary resources to concert international efforts, in close co-operation with the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), for the rapid elimination of apartheid. We therefore also st~ongly support the conclusions and recommendations in the report of the Special Committee against Apartheid. We endorse the Committee's programme of work for 1986, since we believe that this would not only help to maintain the current international momentum against apartheid but enable it to mohilize and intensify opposition to the Pretoria regime. The Government of Nigeria will actively aid and sustain the work of the Special Committee in this respect and will continue to provide direct political, diplomatic, i~terial and moral aid to all those struggling against the inhuman system. In Security Council resolution 418 (1977) the United Nations instituted an arms embargo against South Africa. Unfort~fiately, numerous substantiated reports reveal that the arms embargo has been violated with impunity by some transnational corporations and individuals in the Western countries. It must be obvious to those corporations and individuals that their quest for high profit has increased the statistics of the dead, as well as the funeral processions in South Africa. It should be clear to those corporations, and their home Governments, in fact, that their percentage of sales of arms, in defiance of Security Council resolution 418 (1977), bears a direct. correlation to the blood flow of the dying and the dead, those WkiO are being killed daily by the agents of the terrorist regime in South Africa. The Nigerian delegation wishes to emphasize the importance of an effective and comprehe-sive embargo on the sale or export to or the purchase from racist Pretoria of any kind of arms. Equally deserving of effective and scrupulous implementation and monitoring is the oil embargo. Oil is vital for the economic survival of South Africa. This is demonstrated by the extent to which th~ 2retoria regime has gone to set up oil-swapping arrangements and falsify information on the movement of oil tankers. We hope, therefore, that the oil embargo will be tightened and the loopholes closed. (Mr. Adeniji, Nigeria) ItsbOuldbe recalled that the General Assembly, in its resolution adopted in 1980, called for a cultural and sports boycott against South Africa for as long as apartheid prevails in that country. It is with appreciation that my delegation notes that the Ad Hoc Committee on the Drafting of an International Convention against Apartheid in Sports has completed its work and submitted the draft convention to the General Assembly for adoption. We will su~rt the adoption of the draft: convention and we urge all Member states to join in its aitoption. We also appeal to all ~ember States for speedy signing and ratification of the convention, which, we believe will greatly contrib~te to the isolation of the regime in south Africa. The effectiveness of ~ll these actions against racist South Africa, coherently and logically, should tie up with the application of comprehensive mandatory economic sanctions against it. It is not my intention to take issue with the farcical and hypocritical position expressed by certaln Western countries that argue that sanctions would not work and would only hurt more the black South Africans as well as the front-line and other neighbouring states. Our position on the issue has been stated on many occasions, but it bears repetition. Comprehensive and mandatory sanctions against South Africa can be effective. South Africa, being a highly dependent economy with a high percentage of foreign investments, can be vulnerable to economic sanctions, and although the front-line States and other neighbouring States may suffer as a result of sanctions, they have collectively and individually stated their willingness to bear any adverse consequences arising from sanctions aimed a~ the elimination of apartheid. The level of capitalization of the South African econom¥ being so high, the percentage of the indigen~~s majority involved in the market economy is in fact insignificant, and theref.ore, their suffering through sanctions cannot be greater than the current agony and bondage of apartheid. In any case, people who are ready to sacrifice even their lives in the struggle against apartheid cannot be concerned about temporary economic reverses. Let there be no mistake, thereforeJ th~ oppressed people of South Africa will pay any price, suffer any hardship, for the eradication of that inhuman and degrading policy. Those who oppose sanctions with the excuse that it will hurt black South Africans or the neighbouring Statea are in our view patently dishonest. They should come out openly and state their real reason - conce~n for their investments. They should make open confession that the profit motive is stronger than their concern for human lives in South Africa, not to speak of human rights. But, then, they should also stop pointing accusing fingers at others in order to score ideological points. My delegation calls upon the General Assembly to request the Security Council once again to convene urgently, with the sole purpose of imposing comprehensive mandatory economic santions against aeartheid South Africa. We believe that that (Mr. Adeniji, Nigeria) is the great contribution that the Security Council and the united Nations can make to the determined struggle of the South African people at this time. In the year since this item was last considered ~ the General Assembly a concerted and persistent manifestation of open opposition to apartheid has been taking place both inside and outside South Africa. Internally the non-whites, particularly the blacks, have daily demonstrated to register their disgust at the whole system and the so-called reform which Botha thought would put a human face on an inhuman system. The so-called constitutional reform, which created separate chambers for the Coloureds and Indians, but excluded the blacks from the electoral process, has been condemned by all. The non-white PeOple of south Africa have joined the international community in denouncing this fraudulent manoeuvre. The resultant peaceful protests brought out the true nature of Mr. Botha, the rabid ra~ist masquerading as a reformer. He sent armed police and soldiers out against unarmed men, women and children. He imposed a state of emergency and gave his armed bandits unlimited licence to commit daily cold-blooded murder. In the event, almost 800 men, women and children have been killed in the past year. Apparently embarrassed by the image which media coverage of those brutal acts has given his ungodly regime, Botha has begun a crackdown on pressmen, particularly foreign journalists. Of course, it is clear that he can no longer prevent the truth from coming out, just as he has failed to repress the quest of the South African people for freedom. In the past year, too, external opposition to apartheid has been intensified in many countries. Men and women, black and white, have demonstrated to draw attention to the inhumanity of the system of apartheid and, often, to put pressure on their own Governments to stop collaboration with the Pretoria regime. One of the most spectacular achievements of those pressures was recorded here in the , United States, where the campaign for disinvestment and economic boycott has been (~. Adeniji, Nigeria) persistent. My delegation hopes that constructive engagement, which really has not yielded fruitful results, except for the South African regime, will give way to constructive co-operation to hasten the demise of apartheid. In the meantime, my delegation draws comfort from the firm stand against apartheid taken in the past year by more Governments, such as those of Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Obviously, thexe is still a long way to go, but we dare hope that those Governments that still express an undeserved confidence in Botha's rationality and, as permanent members, prevent the Security Council from imposing sanctions to bring down his unrepresentative regime, will have a change of heart. In that connection, I am impelled to quote two of the most poignant passages from the speeches delivered last week from this rostrum. On 23 OCtober Prime Minister Mulroney, of Canada, had the following to say on the theme of human rights: "Only one country has established colour as the hallmark of systematic inequality and repression. Only South Africa determines the fundamental human rights of individuals and groups within its society by this heinous method of classification. This institutionalized contempt for justice and dignity desecrates internation~l standards of morality." (A/40/PV.47, p. 26). The next day President Reagan, of the united States, said: "What kind of people will we be 40 years from today? May we answer: free people, worthy of freedom and firm in the conviction that freedom is not the sole prerogative of a chosen few, but the universal right of all God's children." (A/40/PV.48, p. 3) Nowhere else do we all have the obligation to turn the noble vision of universal respect for human rights into reality but in South Africa, where, without doubt, some of God's children, even if they are non-whites, live. In conclusion, permit me to reiterate that the struggle of the people of South Africa has today reached a new level. That struggle justifiably holds unprecedented international significance. The liberation of South Africa will not only rid the world of the scourge of apartheid, but will also enable the people of Namibia, for whom the United Nations has assumed special responsibility, to attain self-determination and independence. Additionally, it will permit the neighbouring States to consolidate their hard-won independence and build their national economies, which are being constantly disrupted by the attacks of the apartheid regime. The eradication of apartheid will blot out the most potent threat to international peace and security in that part of the world. There is no greater cause of regional instability in Africa than apartheid. The United Nations and all Member States have a responsibility to take urgent and effective action to dismantle that iniquitous policy. Nigeria will give its total support, as it has always done, to the international effort. The meeting rose at 6.30 p.m. (Mr. Adeniji, Nigeria)