A/40/PV.52 General Assembly

I should like to remind representatives that, in accordancg with the decision taken yesterday afternoon by the Assembly, the list of speakers in the debate will be closed this afternoon at 5 o'clock. I therefore request reprasentatives wishing to participate in the debate to put their names on the list as soon as possible. Mr.OSMAN (Somalia): Since this is the first time I have made a substantial statement in the Assembly at this session, Sir, I wish to offer you my delegation's most sincere and warm felicitations on your assumption of the presidency of this historic fortieth session of tb,l; United Nations General Assembly. Those of us who are acquainted with your ability, diplomatic skill and wealth of experience are fully assured that you will guide ~ur deliberations to success. I should also like to take this opportunity to recognize the valuable contributions made by Mr. Joseph Garba both in his inspiring address and comprehensive report to the Assembly yesterday in his capacity as Chairman of the Special committee.against Apartheid and as Chairman of the African Group for this month. We pay a tribute to him for his dedication and commitment to the cause of the oppressed people In southern Africa. Let me also congratulate the Rapporteur of the Special Committee, Mr. Mitra, on his lucid and detailed introeuction of the report of the Comm~ttee. We are indeed fortunate to have Mr. Akhund, Assistant Secretary-General and Director of the Centre against Apartheid, his secretary and the staff of the Centre for their untiring efforts and invaluab:e contributions to the work of the Special Committee. AS an active member of the Special Committee ag~inst Apartheid, Somalia contin~es to play an important part in the intensification of the international campaign against apartheid. My delegation brings mixed feelings of frustration a~d pride to the debate on the question of apartheid at this particular time when we have been assesning the achievements of the United Nations and when we are witnessing a new and critical phase of the liberation struggle in South Africa. We share, first of all, the universal sense of outrage that the legitimate and courageous struggle of the non-white majority in South Africa is being brutally Opposed by the forces of injustice and oppression. We take a measure of pride, however, in the General Assembly 8s unwavering ~esolve over the years to keep the question of apa!theid before the conscience of the world and also to assure the oppressed people of South A!rica that they are not alone in their struggle. It was little more than a decade after the defeat of nazism that South Africa's Nationalist Government launched its apartheid plan. It was promptly recognized in the General Assembly that the world was faced with a new attempt to implement the theory of the master race and to strip peoples of their rights and their very humanity on grounds of race and colour. The evidence of the past 30 years has only served to reinforce the jUdgement that the policies of apartheid, like those of the Nazis, constitute a c~ime against humanity. It must therefore be a matter of satisfaction to us all that the moral pressures exerted by the international campaign, under the leadership of the Special Committee against Apartheid, have had a cumulative effect which is clearly evident today. It is largely due to those efforts that people in every area of the world have been made aware of the evil nature of apartheid. Unfortunately, we must also face the fact that moral indignation and verbal condemnations have not served in the past to inhibit the entrenchment of apartheid. Alone, they will certainly not serve today to persuade South Africa's privileged minority to take the necessary st~p~ to dismantle apartheid and create a just society. Only firm and concerted action by the international community can provide effective support for the liberation struggle of South Africa's oppressed people. Regrettably, the General Assembly's strategy of isolating South Africa through the severing of all political, diplomatic, military, economic and cultural ties with the apartheid regime has been undermined in the past by the non-compliance of South Africa's main trading partners. However, current developments in South Africa provide a new opportunity and new incentives for universal co-operation in the full range of measures proposed by the General Assembly in its anti-apartheid resolutions. The massacres of men and women at Sharpeville and children at Soweto were landmark events in the history of the struggle against injustice in South Africa. But those indications of the brutality of apartheid gave rise to only short-lived indignation followed by business as usual with the minority regime. Today, when the frustration and anger of the non-white communities throughout South Africa can no longer be contained and deadly confrontation with the forces of oppression has become a way of life, the world community is challenged as never before to take steps to bring about the elimination of apartheid. It would indeed be shameful if this fortieth anniversary of the United Nations were to be marked by yet another r failure to respond effectively to one of the great moral issues of our time. The issue of apartheid is not, of course, simply one of morality. In our view the Security Council has a grave responsibilir1 to act with urgency in a situation which threatens international peace and security. The threat i:o peace is clearly indicated by the imminence of a long and bloody racial conflict in southern Africa ,I by south Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia, which constitutes an act of aggression against the Namibian people;. and by South Africa's desperate attempt to impose a racist hegemony through lawless al.~ brutal military aggression against neighbouring States. In our view, the only measure commensurate with the needs of this dangerous situation is the imposition by the Security Council of mandatory and comprehensive sanctions, including an oil embargo, against South Africa. It is often maintained that sanctions do not work and would harm the non-white people of South Africa most of all. It may well be asked what greater harm could come to. the oppressed majority than continued sUffering and humiliation under apartheid. Furthermore, it is evident that South Africa is indeed sensitive to international pressures. Wherever such pressures have been vigorously applied, as in the field of sport, there have been tangible results. Only a short while ago it was inconceivable that influential business and political groups from SOuth Africa's white community would seek out the leaders of the exiled African National Congress for talks. Those groups are surely being influenced not only by the ~ dangers of internal conflict but also by external pressures. The movement towards divestment from companies which do business with South Africa and the willingness of some of South Africa's main trading partners to take limited, but none the less concrete, economic measures against apartheid have made the possibility of wider sanctions seems real for the first time, and this is having an effect. My Government welcomes the implementation of official policies by some Governments with regard to new investment in, and loans to, South Africa and the sale of Krugerrands. We also welcome the Security Council's resolution calling for similar action. We believe, however, that the momentum achieved by those measures must be widened and further intensified. The experience of the past indicates that South Africa's white minority will continue to obstruct the paths of justice, reason and peace unless it receives from tne international community the strong and unmistakable signal that all measures avaiiable under the Charter will be used to eliminate apartheid. We hope that no one will be taken in by the propaganda campaiqn of the Botha regime, which seeks to cover the reality of apartheid with semantic devices and to substitute promises of reform for positive change. Such promises cannot be considered sincere when South Africa ignores the call of the world community to free imprisoned leaders such as Nelson Mandela and negotiate with them fo~ the creation of a just society. My delegation strongly supports the proposal of the cu~rent Chairman of the -. Organization of African Unity, the President of Senegal, Uis Excellency Mr. Abdou Diouf, that an international conference on sanctions against South Africa be held in June next year. We have often suggested in the past that South Africa's main trading partners should consult among themselves and with other States on ways in which sanctions could be most effectively imposed. We hope that they will be prepared to bring practical proposals and the necessary political will to a conference on sanctions. The developing countries in the front line of the conflict in southern Africa may well be the ones most severely affected by sanctions, but they have made it clear that they are prepared to make the necessary sacrifices. It would, of course, be of paramount imPOrtance for the front-line States to receive appropriate economic assistance from the international community to enable them to overcome the special problems they would face as a result of the imposition of economic sanctions against South Africa. As Member States are no doubt aware, Article 50 of the Charter provides for such situations. My delegation believes that close co-operation between all the States concerned is eminently practicable and would assure the success of international efforts directed against apartheid. The Charter of the United Nations and the many other relevant declarations and resolutions which champion human rights, especially the right to self-determination and freedom, demand nothing less than the maximum effort on the part of us all. Now is the time for action. Let us hope that the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations will be aarked by the solemn resolve of all States to work for the total elimination of the obnoxious system of apartheid and ~or the establishment of 3 non-racial, democratic society in a unified South Africa, with the full participation of all its people. Let: us in this world Assembly redouble our efforts to ensure the attainment of that goal, so that the oppressed people in South Africa may realize without delay their inalienable rights to justice, freedom and human dignity, in an atmosphere of peace, harmony and progress. Sit' John TBOMSON (United Kingdom): In this commemorative year we have reviewed both the strengths and the shortcomings of the United Nations as never before. There has been some commendably frank speaking. 1 sense two underlying themes, colllllOn to nearly all of us. The first is that Member States remain genuinely committed to the ideals and principles of the United Nations. The second is that t...ere is an urgent nc.ed to enhance the impact and the authority of our Organization. It is in this spirit that we in the General Assembly should address the annual debate on apartheid. We must subject United Nations work on t;his topic to the same rigorous review. Are we getting it right? Or is there substance to the criticism that we have introduced extraneous ideological and political considerations? Have we allowed an issua of enormous public concern to be treated as part of the annual ritual? L I count myself fortunate to be speaking today under your presidency, Sir. It is an honour to our ancient European civilization that we should have you, a notable representative of a notable country, to preside over the fortieth session. Moreover, your' experience - may I say your unique expel'ience ~ is of great value to all the dele9ati~ns here. That leads me to make an unscripted intervention. I have just asked: -Have we allowed an issue of enormous public concern to be treated as part of the annual ritual?- This is only ray fourth session of the General Assembly; but I have to say that even in those four years' - which certainly do not compare with your 29 years, Mr. President - I have been struck by the way in which the General Assembly drones • on. There is, it seems to me, not enough effort to listen to the arguments. Assumptions are made whenever a speaker gets up as to what he is going to say, and so he is not often listened to. I believe it is a pity that ~hen this debate began yesterday afternoon with a statement by the Chairman of the Special Committee against ~artheid it should have been so thinly attended. I do not complain that it is thinly attended first thing this morning when I am speaking, but I do think it is a pity that we do not take each other I s arguments more ser iously. I do not want to make this IIIOrn1ng a ritual statement, and I hope that I shall not be listened to in a ritualistic manner. SOme of the things I am going to say will not be supported by very many delegations; others will have unanimous support. I hope that both parts of what I have to say - those bits that will be supported unanimously and those bits that may represent minority views - will be listened to and weighed with attention. As I have said, this is not a ritualistic statement. And I want to underline this by asking the question: Are we making it easy for those who hold power in SOUth Africa to ignore the views of us in the General Assembly? (Sir John Thomson, united Kingdoll) A house divided against itself cannot stand. So it is with our case on apartheid. On no other issue that I can call to mind is the General Assembly as united as it is in its opposition to apartheid and - although this lies outside the scope of this debate - to the external as well as the internal policies of the South African Government. In pursuing these policies South Africa has no allies, no friends, no supporters, no defenders. Not a single speaker' in this debate will find any justification in apartheid. All United Nations Members, so far as I am aware, have taken steps to underpin their opposition to apartheid. This is, indisputably, a common cause. But it is a cause which we undermine wheneuer, out of our unity, we create disunity; whenever we divide our house, instead of uniting it; whenever we attack each other, which is easy but facile, instead of attacking the much more daunting question of how to promote the peaceful and rapid e~olution of a just society in South Africa. The first step, therefore, towards achieving greater impact on South Africa in our discussion of apartheid must simply be the recognition that we share a common goal. That goal is the establishlllE!nt of a just society in South Africa in which no person or group, of whatever colour, race or tribe, is deprived of civil or political rights or subjugated to the domination of others. Let us get it clear that we have the problem of apartheid on one side of the table with all the memers of the General Assembly on the other. Then we can concentrate our attention and our efforts on the common problem. Certainly, where my own country is concerned, no one who has studied the birth, with all-Party support, of the Anti-~artheid Movement in Britain; the speeches proclaiming a wind of change delivered with such impact by Hr Harold Macmillan in Lagos and Cape Town 25 years ago; the removal of South Africa from the Commonwealth; the intensive debate in Parliament and the press over more than a quarter of a century; or the unequivocal statements and actions of successive British Governments and Prime Ministers right up to the present day; no one who has paid the slightest attention to such things can entertain any doubt of the sincerity or the profundity of British revulsion at apartheid. We have brought this home to the Government of SOuth Africa, and we resent any suggestion to the contrary. The United Kingdom welcomes the increasing concern of the international cOllll1unity about apartheid, which was fully reflected, for example, in the statemen't made with our support on behalf of the member States of the European Community. With our friends in the Commonwealth and the European Community - who together co~rise over one third of the United Nations membership - we have worked to iJlpress a united view on South Africa. In the past two months we and our partners have adopted specific measures to underpin that view. Likewise, in the wider context of the United Nations, we wish to build with other countries on a shared foundation. I therefore regret ~e surprising and unjustifiable attack on the joint policies of the member States of the European Community which appears in the report of the Special Committee against Apartheid. I am sure that those who have listened to the statement of the Permanent Representative of Luxembourg yesterday afternoon will agree that those policies, including the valuable visit to South Africa by three European Foreign Ministers, have been misrepresented in a way which does not help our efforts to create a united approach. I must add that I also regret and resent the attacks made specifically on my country. The first requirement, then, is a united front. The second is to aim it precisely at the right target. TO do this we should develop a better understanding of South Africa and of what is actually going on there. This may seem a curious thing to say when we are inundated with vivid media reports of appalling events in South Africa and when United Nations documents on the subject are reproduced by the yard. (Sir John Thomson, UniteGl Kingdom) Yet, like almost all of us here, I have no first-hand experience of South Africa. But I share with many others a deep unease that we cannot grapple effectively with this subject unless we have a proper understanding of its complications. The reports we ourselves publish in the United Nations, based on secondary and selective sources, tend inevitably to become repetitive and superficial and to oversimplify the situation. We risk placing ourselves in the position of a doctor trying to prescribe a quick cure without benefit of a proper diagnosis. The member States of the European Community accordingly asked three of their Foreign Ministers to visit South Africa in August, to talk to the Government and to community leaders, and to see for themselves. In a similarly constructive move, the Commonwealth countries will be establishing in the very near future a group of eminent representatives to encourage, through all practicable ways, the evolution of political dialogue in SOI,;';-h ;ifrica. I underline that this is a common position of 49 Commonwealth countries. \s it to be criticized by the Special Committee? Here at the united Nations we too need to consider how we can benefit fro~ taking a closer and more analytical look at the problem. Apartheid is quite unlike other items on our agenda. Namibia, Cambodia, Cyprus, Afghanistan, the Western Sahara and so on: these are all international questions to which specific answers can be envisaged. They are the sorts of questions which the mechanisms established by the founding fathers of the United Nations were intended to deal 'with. Settlement proposals for those pp:oblems have been formulated within the United Nations, and the United Nations is engaged in negotiations on them. South Africa, on the other hand, is an internal problem for itself and a moral problem for the international community. It is a unique problem to which there is not a clearly definable and definitive answer. We all know that (Sir John Thomson, United Kingdom) apartheid cannot continue. By now, even the vast majority of the white population of South Africa also recognize this fact, although they are understandably apprehensive about what might replace the present system. That is primarily a matter for all the people of South Africa. The United Nations was not set up to draft constitutions for its Members. We at the United Nations can suggest guidelines, erect signposts. But with our limited knowledge and experience of the immensely complex situation in South Africa we are manifestly not in a position to prescribe in any detail that country's future constituti01al arrangements. To try to do so would be a negation of self-determination for the peoples of South Africa. We mayor we may not like some statement by a particular group or movement, but whichever view we take, we must respect the right of South Africans to rule themselves. We must recognize, therefore, that it is for the people of South Africa - all the people of South Africa, of all races, communities and persuasions - to determine the shape of their own future, and that they will have no easy task in doing so in a way which both satisfies the larger groups and safeguards the legitimate rights of a wide variety of minorities. Many people seem to suppose that the population of South Africa is composed of only four groups. In reality, the number of groups runs into doubl~ figures. The complex legacy of history has been exacerbated by gravely mistaken and inhumane internal policies. It is almost entirely due to internal pressures that those policies are beginning to change, though desperately late and desperately slowly. The ruling minority cannot hold back the tide, nor should they. There I have always been some in the white community who have sought a different way forward, who have acknowledged the need to grant power to the disenfranchised and justice to the oppressed, and who have pursued contacts with other groups. But at the same time, the Government, the armed forces and the police have responded to (Sir John Thomson, united Kingdom) dissent with violence and to violence with greater violence. They have de~nstrated unbelievable blindness to the long-term consequences of a policy of unthinking repression. Faced with this situation, what should we at the United Nations do? We condemn apartheid, and rightly so, but it has become a cliche to say that condemnation is not enough. We all wish to do something to bring it to an end, and therein lie our difficulties. The fundamental and systematic abuse of human rights in South Africa must not be ignored, but in the particular circumstances of the turmoil of South Africa, the traditional devices for the peaceful settlement of disputes between States do not fit the bill. In this debate we have heard and we will hear a range of suggestions. Some advocate armed struggle. Is that really what the United Nations exists to promote? The United Nations was founded in order to prevent and to end conflict, not to exacerbate it. The United Nations cannot and should not favour the violence of one group rather than the violence of another. For us it is a moral problem, and we must be against all violence and in favour of justice. Besides, if we promote yet greater violence within South Africa, the effect in the short term will be to send more people to their deaths, while hardening attitudes and making change well nigh impossible, and in the longer term, through polarization of the communities, it will be to engender the worst possible outcome. Must the peoples of South Africa be destroyed in order to be saved? The answer, morally speaking, is obvious. Some argue for the total isolation of South Africa. They would have us cut off all communications, visits, personal contacts, television programmes, films, newSPapers - even letters and telephone calls. But if we cut off the white (Sir John Thomson, United Kingdom) population, how can we influence them and encourage them to adopt more enligbtened values? And shall we belp tbe oppressed by sbutting tbem off from the encouragement and support tbey now receive? We and our partners bave always argued against the isolation of peoples, in wbatever area of the world, and in favour of the freest and widest possible excbange of ideas. We bave long followed a policy of breaking down the barriers bet.ween peoples, for example tbrough the negotiat.ions at the Conference on security and C~peration in Europe and tbrough tbe United Nations itself on a global scale. Our attitude is to let people listen to the arguments. Let tbere be a public gallery, as there is bere at the United Nations. But the South African Government does not agree. Why was it that the South African authorities were reluctant to let television into their country? Why, in the last few waeks, have they censured American news magazines? We need South Africans to hear and see thf;: truth. If we cut them off from the outside influences of which their l.ead'4!rs are so nervous, we shall help to entrench their outdated attitudes. We shall delay ~~ecisely the changes we desire. Incidentally, we shall also destroy our own understanding of SOuth Africa. Considerable numbers of politicians, academics, journalists, churchmen and people from many walks of life from my country visit South Africa each year. They do not go there in order to bolster apartheid. But they both inform us better of what is going on ann inform SOuth Africans of all races of what the outside world thinks. At present SOuth Africans are largely protected from the truth. Let us not make the situation worse and build another iron curtain around South Africa. Some, indeed a great many, call for comprehensive economic sanctions. This reflects the feeling of despair, of desperation, which the South African crisis arouses in us all. I do not impugn their motives and, by the same token, I ask them not to impugn mine, for our goal is the same. I simply ask whether comprehensive sanctions are an effective way to achieve the end of apartheid. The answer is that they are not and, on the contrary, would counteract the effective forces of the market which are undermining apartheid. The many measures we have put in place are a powerful political signal designed to exert pressure on the South Africans and to leave them in no shadow of a doubt about our stance. But economic sanctions, although they may have a punitive effect, have never succeeded in resolving an international problem - from Abyssinia to Rhodesia - and there is no basis for thinking that they would resolve the internal problems of South Africa. The white So~th Africans are indeed concerned about the possibility of sanctions but they are also prepared. They know how difficult it would be to enforce sanctions effectively. They have "developed the basis of a siege economy. It is sUfficiently large ~d adaptable to survive on its own, even if only with difficulty and at the cost of economic growth. Far from causing the white South Africans to give up power, comprehensive sanctions would reinforce their determination to resist change. Thus the forces within South Africa which are pushing the Government into concessions would be neutef~d. It would be a case of one step forward and two paces backward. The other consequences of comprehensive sanctions are well known, though often dismissed far too lightly. I make no bones about the fact that sanctions would be extremely damaging for Western countries, inclUding the united Kingdom. It is not a fact we have ever sought to conceal. we do not see the sense, however, of punishing the ordinary people of Britain because the South Af.rican Government is pursuing bad policies~ Nor do we see the sense of inflicting grave damage on the e~onomies of central and southern African countries. Least of all do we see the sense of reversing the economic growth which has been such a stimulus to the forces for change within South Africa. Few people outside South A£rica itself have bothered to study how much British business has contributed to the prosperity and advancement of black South Africans. British companies have created jobs for over 100,000 black workers in South Africa, providing support for five times that number - in other words, half a million - in the black community. They also give direct assistance to educational programmes, technical training and community housing for blacks. Britain played perhaps the biggest role in setting up and improving the European Community Code of Conduct for companies with interests in South Africa. Partly as a consequence of all this the past few years have seen increasing black economic power, the emergence of black trade unions and improved black education and training. Il"l the last several years the wages of black employees have increased more quickly by a lot than those of the white population. This has a political as well as an econoRdc effect. Industrialization has served as a major spur to the dismantling of apartheid, as the leaders of SOuth African industry have themselves recognized. It is through the intensification of such processes as these that apartheid will most rapidly be killed. It is instructive to look at the list of wh~te SOUth Africans who have gone or tried to go to Zambia to hold talks with black SOuth African representatives. In this context a prime requirement is the unconditional release of Mr. Nelson Mandela. I stress that the solution will come from SOuth African pressures on SOUth Africans. I repeat that change in SOuth Africa will not come from external sanctions any more than it did in the smaller and more vulnerable territory of Southern Rhodesia. I feel a moral responsibility to say this plainly and publicly. Many in this Assembly think the same but are inhibited from saying so from this rostr~. Change in South Africa will come about - is indeed already coming about - principally through the tremendous pressures within. But this does not mean that there is no role for us on the outside. On the contrary, we have an important part to play. What can we best do to help? We must show that we are united in our goal, and must resist all attempts to use apartheid as a politically or ideologically divisive issue. For an expression of our common goal I cannot improve on the statement attributed in The New York Times to the Indian Prime Minister, Mr. Rajiv Gandhi: -an end to apartheid with a minimum of trauma and Qifficulties for all the people who l.ive in SOuth Africa and tile evolution ·of a free society there-. (The New York Times, 18 OCtober 1985, p. ~ 3) We ~st lose no opportunity to understand SOuth African conditions properly and must ignore no channel for communicating our views to SOUth Africa's peoples. . ~e must convince the people of south Africa that we are not seeking to destroy their ,country, to replace one form of repression by another or to dictate the future of post-apartheid society. We must encourage those who are actively seeking to make constructive changes by showing them that the international community applauds their efforts and is far from wanting to punish the innocent together with the guilty. We must maintain strong pressures for change. This includes, of course, the mandatory arms embargo. In the case of the united KingdOlll and of our partners in the Commonwealth and the European Community, it also embraces the wide-ranging measures we have adopted collectively, such as bans on new government loans, on government funding for trade missions, on the export of computers for use by the military.or police, on new contracts for the sale of nuclear goods and technology, ard the export of oil. It would be appropriate if all Members of the united Nations followed this lead and actually enforced the same measures in their own countries. We must take positive steps to help the advancement of black South Africans, such as the European Community's Code of Conduct, the creation of jobs for black workers, the provision of scholarships of various kinds and of training for black trade unionists, and assistance to refugees. We must pay careful attention to the vulnerability of the countries neighbouring and economically dependent upon South Africa, and must support such efforts as the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference (SADCC). We must continue to monitor closely and react strongly to all abuses of human rights. Above all, we must impress upon the South African Government the urgency and absolute necessity of implementing the five points set out in the ~ommonwealth Accord. They must, first, declare that the system of apartheid will be dismantled and specific and meaningful action taken in fulfilment of that intent; secondly, terminate the existing state of emergency; thirdly, release immediately and unconditionally Nelson Mandela and all others imprisoned and detained for their opposition to apartheid; fourthly, establish political freedom and specifically lift the existing ban on the African National Congress of South Africa (ARC) and other political parties, and fif~hly, initiate, in the context of a suspension of violence on all sides, a process of dialogue across lines of colour, politics and religion, with a view to establishing a non-racial and representative government. These are the salient points of my Government's approach to the South African crisis. It is an approach which we have developed in consultation with our partners in the Commonwealth and the European Community, and with other United Nations Members. It is a forward policy which the General Assembly as a whole could usefully adopt. It is the most effective and in our view the quickest way to end apartheid. That is ou~ prime and common goal. Let us also be united in our methods. The time for change in South Africa has come. The message that issues from this General Assembly can help or hinde~. Let us give our support to the internal pressures which in a determined, honourable and peaceful way will bring democracy to all the peoples of South Africa. Mr. LI Luye (China) (interpretation from Chinese): Since the beginning of the current session of the General Assembly, leaders of various countries attending the commemorative activities have unanimously condemned the system of apartheid pursued by the South African authorities and demanded the complete eradication of this barbarous system that tarnishes human dignity in the 1980s. Their denunciation and their demand give a forceful expression to the common strong aspiration and call of all the countries and peoples of the world which uphold justice. The situation in South Africa has seriously deteriorated and become a major international issue attracting world-wide attention in the past year, as a result of the continued refusal by the South African racist authorities to implement the solemn resolutions of the United Nations, their intensification of political intrigues and military suppression, and their obstinate intransigence in pursuing the policy of apartheid. At the end of laat year, the Botha r~ime masterminded the farce of enforcing the ·new constitution·, which seemingly grants rights to the coloured and to people of Asian origin but in fact sets them apart, a move aimed at sowing discord between them and the black people. Later, it expressed willingness to apen dialogue with Relected black leaders· and grant South African citizenship to the black people in the so-called homelands. However, none of these measures touches the foundation of the apartheid system and the white minority rule, and the decision-making power of the Government remains in the firm grip of a handful of white racists. As the so-called -reforms- of the Botha regime is an out and out hoax, they have naturally been rejected squarely by the broad masses of the South African people and spurned by the overWhelming majority of countries throughout the world and by public opinion. After its political intrigues were exposed, the Botha regime immediately resorted to troops and armed police to suppress with all cruelty the protests of the black people, resulting in several serious incidents of bloodshed. On 20 July this year, the South African authorities went so far as to declare a state of emergency in scores of cities and towns. On 25 October, they declared the extension of the state of emergency to Cape Town and some other areas. According to incomplete statistics, over 750 people have been killed, over a thousand injured, and thousands detained or arrested. Lately, in total disregard of the appeal by the Security Council and the warning by the international community, the Botha regime bloodily, executed Mr. Benjamin Moloise, a black poet, who is opposed to apartheid. All this thoroughly exposed the vicious and reactionary features of , the Botha regime. However, the awakened South African people have been neither hoodwinked ~ the hypocritical reforms of the South African authorities, nor intimidated by their bloody repression. Since the end of last year, there has been a new upsurge in the struggle against the system of apartheid, a struggle mainly participated in by the black people, and also by people of other races in South Africa. Strikes by workers and students and mass demonstrations have swept through all the black towns and are spreading to areas inhabited by the white people. These activities are unprecedented both in terms of mass participation and of their scale. The black liberation organizations in South Africa and the United Democratic F~ont, with the participation of people of all races, are growing stronger. Pair-minded persons in business and political circles in South Africa have started a direct dialogue with the liberation organization on the future of South Africa. It can be said with certainty that so long as the .South Africa authorities cling to the apartheid system, the liberation struggles of the SOuth Africa people for racial equality will not cease. They will only grow further and surge forward. The struggle of the people in South Africa has not only received firm support from the vast number of African countries and other third world countries, but also has won sympathy and assistance from all the justice-upholding countries. Since this year, there have been rallies and mass demonstrations all over the world with the participation of schools, trade unions, women's organizations and people from religious and political circles and various activities sponsored by international and non-governmental organizations, as well as local governments of some countries, calling for a boycott of exchanges with South Africa in support of the just struggle of the South African people. The Security Council has adopted resolutions, calling on countries to take sanction measures against South Africa. Some countries have recalled their diplomatic envoys, declared a cessation of fresh investments in South Africa, stopped their trade and refused sports and cultural exchanges with it. Under heavy internal and external pressures, a few countries that maintain clcse relations with South Africa have also started to take limited economic measures against South Africa. It must be pointed out that the United Nations Special Committ~e Against Apartheid, under the guidance of its Chairman, Ambassador Garba of Nigeria, has done a lot of fruitful work, for which we wish to express our appreciation and support. It is the view of the Chinese delegation that as the soutb African authorities, in their persistent defiance of various United Nations resolutions, have obstinately clung to the policy of apartheid, thus furthet aggravating the situation in South Africa, the international community should further mobilize and take more effective sanction measures against South Africa. The country that has up to date taken a position of appeasement and accommodation with SOuth Africa should immediately change its policy of constructive engagement and, together with other countries, make an effort to help eliminate apartheid by exerting heavier pressure on South Africa. We also maintain that the following actions should be taken by the General Assembly: First, strongly condemn th~ SOuth Africa authorities' policy of apartheid and their policy of aggression and expansion against the neighbouring countries and call on all Member States to extend greater moral support and material assistance to the South African people and their liberation organization as well as to the front-line African countriesJ Secondly, call on the Security Council to enforce comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa in compliance with Chapter VII of the CharterJ Thirdly, call on all countries to take voluntary sanctions against South Africa pending the adoption of the ~ove-proposed resolution by the Security Council and strictly abide by the United Nations resolution on arms embargo against South AfricaJ Fourthly, strongly demand that the South African authorities lift the state of emergency, stop their bloody suppression of the South African people, and immediately and unconditionally release black leader Nelson Mandela and all the other leaders and innocent people who have been imprisoned or detained on political chargesJ Fifthly, support the Organization of African Unity (OAD) in its proposal to convene an international meeting on sanctions against South Africa next June on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the Soweto upri~ing and co-operate with the OAO in making active preparations to ensure the success of the meeting. The Chinese Government and people will, as always, resolutely support the South African people in their liberation struggle against aparth~id and for winning racial equality and fundamental rights. We are convinced that so long as the south African people strengthen their unity and persist in their struggle with the powerful support of the international community, they will certainly be able to overcome the difficulties and obstacles on their r.oad of advance and win final victory. The apartheid system, a malformation of colonialism, will be swept into the garbage heap of history together with the total collapse of the colonial system. Mr. LE RIM CHUNG (Viet Ham): Mr. President, on behalf of the delegation of the Socialist Republic of Viet Ham, I should like to renew the congratulations that m¥ Minister extended to you and to your predecessor, Mr. Paul Lusaka of Zambia, in the course of the general debate. We asssure you of our full co-operation for the success of the fortieth session of the General Assembly. My delegation deems it an obligation to join the whole world in voicing indignation and condemnation of the policies of apartheid of the Government of SOuth Africa. Apartheid is in every aspect a crime against humanity. It is characterized by the minority's imposition over the majority of the population, a system based on the institutionalized discrimination of the colour of skin. For quite some time, the obnoxious apartheid regime has tried in vain to mislead the people of South Africa and the outside world with some cosmetic social reforms. A referendum was thus forced upon the non-black people. Elections weu. subsequently held allOfl9 that quarter of the population, whicb tjave birth to the so-called trieaaeralpar:liaEnt. 'this is aimed at driving a wedge between the black and the colourec:1 people.. Yet the wolf could not stay long in sbeep's clothing. 'the mask of ilypocrisy fell off· and the poor show was over. South Africa remains a hell on earth for the non-white people. with the notorious pass system and bantustanization, more than 20 million black people are turned.into Stateless human beings in their own country. The recent developments in South Africa have gone far beyond a mere escalation of violence and repression. The state of emergE!ncy proclaimed by the racist regime is tantamount to a declaration of wa~ against the black people, who are now further subjected to a reign of terror by the armed police and defence forces. Hundreds of peOple have been shot to death, thousands have been arrested or detained without trial or have si~~ly disappeared. Leaders of the United Democratic Front have been hunted in an effort to eliminate them. The United Nations, the Non-Aligned Movement, the organization of African Unity and the int~rnational community have vehemently condemned the racist Pretoria regime for all those brutal acts. The racist regime of South Africa is not only the enemy of its own peopleJ it is the enemy of the entire southern African region as well. Pretoria has carried out an undecl.ared war agains~ its neighbouring countries. Its aggression against and occupation of part of the People's Republic of Angola's territory are well-documentedJ its attacks on Zambia and Mozambique, its constant military and economic threat to Lesotho and Botswana, are equally well remembered. Meanwhile, South Africa continues its illegal occuption of Namibia, the last, most important, old-type colony on earth, and is turning it into a springboard from which to conduct aggression and attacks against Angola and other front-line States. Those acts of self-proclaimed gendarmerie by South Africa have caused numerous problems, with serious economic and social consequences to the neighbouring countries. They also constitute a serious threat to the peace, security and stability of the region and of the world. South Africa is, in short, a stronghold of racism, colonialism and neo-fascism in today's world. It is a well-founded belief that the racist Pretoria authorities could never act in such a brazen fashion if they did not have the support, encouragement and protection of certain Western Powers. By masterminding Botha's trip to Western Europe and accompanying it with noisy propaganda, the latter actually lent a helping hand to tart up the image of South Africa, in the hope of breaking its international isolation. The assistance in the nuclear field from certain nuclear Powers and Israel is a cause of grave concern to us all. It is beyond any doubt that once South Africa develops its nuclear capabilities, the racist regime will become much more arrogant and aggressive. It is equally obvious that the racist regime can keep its economic balance only with billions of dollars that flow in from some Western countries in direct investments and bank loans. At the united Nations the veto power has repeatedly been misused in the Security Council to block draft resolutions that call for sanctions against South Africa. The policies of quiet diplomacy and constructive enagement, recently transformed into active constructive engagement, have in fact served as an encouragement to, and political protection for, South Africa in its defiance of the international community. Recent developments in South Africa are of new dimensions and significance. The indigenous people of South Africa have endured enough, from long years under apartheid, with Sharpeville, Soweto,. Crossroads ana now the state of emergency. They have learned that the only way to save themselves is to stand up and fight for their own survival. The struggle for freedom, democracy and social progress now enjoys support not only from the black and coloured people but from the white people as well. The press, despite the censorship, voices criticism of the Governmenti hundreds of businessmen throughout the country have signed petititons demanding changes in the present policies. South Africa has witnessed a nationwide, drastic and unprecedented uprising that is shaking the apartheid regime to its roots. At the same time, it should, happily, be noted that the question of apartheid is now becoming a matter of conscience for the people in ~he west, including the United States. Public opinion in these countries criticises the Governments for their relations with south Africa, demanding disinvestment and more specific, effective measures against the apartheid regime. Under pressure, Parliaments have taken up the matter, and some Governments have announced a number of limited sanctions. The latest case is the" Nassau Declaration adopted at the recent meeting of the Commonwealth Heads of Government, at which they agreed to concert action towards limited sanctions against South Africa. The general debate at the current session has shown the unanimity of world leaders and representatives concerning apartheid. It has also indicated that the time has come for radical changes in South Africa, aimed at the total eradication of apartheid. The delegation of Vietnam vehemently condemns South Africa for its bloody repression of the South African ppJple's struggle for freedom and democracy. We demand that it put an end to those savage acts, release Nelson Mandela and start negotiations with the black leaders. We fully support the South African people in its struggle, under the leadership of the African Nationa,l {Congress, for the establishment of a united, non-racial and democratic society in South Afrj~ca. We strongly cond,emn the undeclared war by South Africa against its neighbouring countries, as we know from experience what this type of war is like. We demand that South Africa immediately grant independence to Namibia, and withdraw without conditions and delay from Angola~ We fully support the front-line states in the defence of their independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Apartheid cannot be reformed; it must be eltminated. Reality has testified to the validity of .this statement by the late Chairperson of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, Mrs. Indira Gandhi. In the struggle to eradicate apartheid, the South African PeOPle should play Cl decisive role and be entitled to use every means possible, including a~~ed struggle, to achieve their goal. But at this critical juncture international sympathy and support is an equally important factor. We are of the view that the international community should rena~!: the people of South Africa, under the leadership of the ANC, and the front-line States the financial and material assistance to help strengthen their resistance against the racist regime in all fields, including military capability. We urge the United Nations to take effective measures, including those called for under Chapter VII of the Charter, against South Africa and we demand that the western countries strictly implement these measures. The argument c~ a certain co~ntry that sanctions would hurt the black people of South Africa and the front-line states is, as the representative of Nigeria put it, dishonest and hypocritical. We have just celebrated the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations. For the question of apartheid it is 40 years long overdue, and we believe that we must do something right now to show that we are really acting along the lines of the principles enshrined in the Charter. Mr. DIEM (Austria): The General Assembly has now been discussing the question of apartheid for more than 30 years. The struggle againBt apartheid is a matter of upholding the fundamental principles of the Charter and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Human rights violations occur in every region of the world. But South Africa is the only State where they are written into the law of the land, the only State where racial discrimination serves as the organizing principle of society. Apartheid violates the very basis of our civilization: the dignity of the human person. It therefore concerns everyone of us. We all have to work together for its elimination. The struggle against apartheid is also an imperative of preserving peace. The persistent attacks by South Africa on neighbouring counries and its refusal to withdraw fr.om Namibia constitute severe threats to international security and to the stability of the region. Only concerted and international pressure will compel the South African Government to abandon these dangerous policies. This session of the General Assembly is diff~=ent from preceding sessions. Over the past months we have witnessed an increasingly serious challenge to apartheid. The majority of the South African population has made clear that it will no longer tolerate the denial of its basic rights. The black political organizations, churches and trade unions have mobilized to eradicate racial discrimination. Their movement has now acquired a momentum and a strength which all the power of the South African security forces cannot suppress forever. For the first time in recent South African history the black majority has gained the initiative. Their struggle, it appears, will intensify and continue until apartheid is eliminated and a new South Africa is created. The South African Government has reacted to the spreading protest movement by increasingly violent repression. The state of emergency was imposed in parts of the country on 21 July, and thousands of political opponents have been arbitrarily arrested and detained. Many people were killed in violent clashes. The recent execution of the poet Benjamin Moloise, in defiance of urgent appeals by the international community, inclUding the Austrian Government, is just one more example of the intransigence of the apartheid regime. There can be no doubt that majority rule will eventually come to South Africa. The real questions are when and under what circumstances. If the present repressive policies are not soon ended, an escalation of violence and counter-violence could lead to widespread bloodshed and a mur~orous civil war. Austria believes that the alternative of a peaceful transformation of South Africa's soei~ty still exists. We note that more and more white South Africans are losing faith in apartheid. There seems to be a growing tendency among them to accept far-reaching changes in the political system. There is still a chance for peaceful change. In our view, at least three conditions will have to be met: Firstly, peaceful change must aim at a free and democratic South Africa with equal rights for al. Secondly, peaceful change cannot be imposed on the majority. Only negotiations with the genuine leaders of the black population can lead to a durable solution. The establishment of a dialogue with the majority leaders without pra-condition is the key to progress in South Africa. Thirdly, no more time must be lost. With every killing, with every outbreak of violence, with every case of p~litical persecution the prospects of peace darken and the risk of a conflagration increases. Injustice and repression over many decades have reaulted in an atmosphere of mistrust and tension. Many black leaders of South Africa still seek change through peaceful means. But the patience of those who oppose violence is running out. The international community must do more than sinply condemn apartheid. By adopting its resolutions 566 (1985) and 569 (1985), containing a set of voluntary sanctions against South Africa, the Security Council has taken a step in the right direction. In accordance with those resolutions, Austria has adopted the following unilateral measures: first, to suspend all investments in South Africa by Austrian public enterprises; secondly, to prohibit the import of Krugerrands and all other gold coins minted in South Africa; thirdly, to impose restrictions in the field of sports and cultural relations; fourthly, to stop Government guarantees for export· credits until further notice; fifthly, to prohibit the participation of public enterprises in South African procurement procedures in the nuclear field; and, sixthly, to prohibit all exports of computer equipment that might be used by the South African army and police. Austria has also taken further steps to tighten the arms embargo against South Africa, and it observes the ban on imports of arms from South Africa recommended by the Security Council. The international community must intensify its efforts to alleviate the suffering of the victims of apartheid, to support the democratic black organizations and to hc1p the front-line States. Austria will continue to contribute financially to United Nations programmes for southern Africa. Austria has also recently @ade a special contribution to help Winnie Mandela. The main burden of the struggle against apartheid is carrie~ by the oppressed majority in South Africa, but the United Nations too has an important role to play. Our commitment to the Charter, which was so fervently reaffirmed at the commemorative meetings last week, is also a commitment to the elimination of apartheid. Let us therefore unite our efforts to advance the day when all south Africans, regardless of the colour of their skin, will enjoy democracy, freedom and justice. Mr. RAZZ90QI (Kuwait) (interpretation from Arabic): We are grateful to the Special Committee against Apartheid for the valuable report it has submitted to the General Assembly at its fortieth session. It contains details of the situation in South Africa and describes the measures necessary to eliminate injustice in South Africa as represented by the apartheid regime and the apartheid system pursued by the white minority against the majority population of the country. In the conclusion of its report, the Special Committee draws attention to the fact that "in 1986 it will be 40 years since the United Nations began consideration of the problem of racism in South Africa. It should be an occasion both for an assessment of the role of the United Nations in meeting the challenge posed by apartheid to an Organization that was born out of a ghastly world war against Nazi racism and for determined and decisive action." (A/40/22, para. 405) Accordingly, Kuwait believes that there could be no better occasion than our commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations to call for the adoption of effective joint measures to put an end to this inhuman system and regime and to establish a non-racial society in South Africa. The international community's inability to eliminate apartheid has resulted in continued severe sUffering for the majority population of South Africa.* Because of its desperate situation, the apartheid stepped up its acts of violence and, on 21 July 1985, declared a state of emergency. The apartheid regime has deployed its armed forces and police in most peaceful African municipalities, on the pretext of preserving peace and security. The state of emergency has led not to peace, security and stability but, on the contrary, to increased trouble in various parts of the country. The declaration of the state was intended * Mr. Bassole (Burkina Faso), Vice-President, took the Chair. principally to give the armed forces and the police unlimited powers to imprison anyone without process of law and to open fire at will. The state of emergency has resulted in the imprisonment of leaders of trade union and other organizations of the people and to the death of peaceful mou~ners participating in funeral processions. Kuwait reiterates its condemnation of the declaration of the state of emergency and of the policies of racism which have brought about the imprisonment of political, trade union and religious leaders. Kuwait calls on the international community to bring pressure to bear on the racist regime to free the African leader Nelson Mandela and other South African political prisoners. Kuwait salutes the popular revolutionary uprising against racism and the struggle to establish a just, democratic society. The oppressive policies and acts of aggression carried out internally by apartheid have been followed by attempts to destroy the stability and security of neighbouring African States. The apartheid regime persists in armed acts of aggression against neighbouring countries, particularly Angola, Mozambique and Botswana, in order to terrorize and provoke them and undermine the peace and the economies of those countries. All these evil attempts by the Pretoria regime are doomed to failure. The indigenous African peoples are determined to endure and to make sacrifices in order to liberate South Africa. The announcement by the racist regime in Pretoria of "reforms" is nothing more the,n a desperate manoeuvre. The apartheid regime's true intentions in South Africa became very clear to the international community when the Pretoria Prime Minister declared at the Nationalist Party Conference last August that the white minority Government would never accept the principle of one man, one vote and rejected the granting of political rights to the black majority and the creation of a democratic, non-ra~ial country. Those who support the so-calledreforll8 of the· apartheid r~ime, what they have oalled power-sharing, or any other psetial arrangements, are merely manoeuvring to strengthen the hold of the white minority and the hateful apArtheid system. (Mr. Razzoogi, Kuwait) The deterioration of the situation in south Africa is due to the apartheid regime's disregard of the united Nations Charter and Unitea Nations resolutions. Responsibility for the continued killings in South Africa does not rest with the . apartheid regime alone, it is shared by some Western European countries, Israel and the United States of America, since they prevent the adoption of effective international measures in accordance with the Charter aimed at forcing Pretoria to comply with the principles of the Charter, abandon apartheid and recognize the legitimate inalienable rights of the indigenous majority in South Africa. Kuwait welcomed certain developments last year and this year, in particular the increasingly popular campaigns in western Europe and the United States which called for the tightening of an economic embargo on the apartheid regime and support for the South African national majority in their just struggle against apartheid policies. The continuous condemnation of apartheid is not sufficient to bring about its elimination. Pretoria can be forced to abandon this policy only through the common will and the co-ordinated efforts of the international community as a whole, and the permanent members of the Security Council in particular, resulting in the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter and the immediate cessation of all military, nuclear and economic co-operation with the apartheid regime. Kuwait is extremely concerned about various developments with regard to co-operation between the apartheid regime in SOuth Africa and the regime in Israel. In its report presented to the General Assembly, the Special Committee against Apartheid states: -the last 10 years have witnessed an increasing collaboration between the two regimes amounting not only to a virtual alliance threatening the peace and security in southern Africa and in the Middle East, but also constituting a threat to international peace and security." (A/40/22/Add.2, para. 1) Kuwait calls upon the international COIIIIUnity to consider very seriously the content of this report and give due t.portance to this shameful ~peration and collaboration. we fully agree with the stateaent made by Mr. ItJgabe, Prime Minister of Zimbabwe, in his message to the Special Comaittee on the occasion of the International Day.for the Eliaination of Racial Discriaination: -This evil crime [of apartheid] is not, of course, confined to the African continent. Indeed, the doctrine of Zionism is as dangerous and racist in concept as apartheid and is as much the real cause of conflict within the Middle East as apartheid itself is the central cause of conflict and tension within SOuth Africa and in the entire region. Nothing better demonstrates, or more clearly proves, the affinity between Zionism and apartheid than the undeniable, ever-growing level of political, military and economic co-operation between the Beers and the Zionists - a truly unholy alliance indeed.- (A/AC.115/PV.561, p. 16) Kuwait condemns that unholy alliance and that close collaboration between the racist regimes of Pretoria and Tel Aviv, in particular in the military nuclear field, which constitutes a direct threat not only to the African and Arab peoples but to the world as a whole. In accordance with the principl~s of the United Nations Charter and resolutions of the United Nations, Kuwait adopted a set of administrative and legislative measures at the national and international levels in order to ensure the implementation of a comprehensive embargo against South Africa in all spheres. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) has operated an oil embargo against South Africa since 1973. Kuwait, with its sister oil-producing Arab countries, adopted a ministerial decision on 6 May 1981 with regard to an oil ed3argo against the apartheid regime in South Africa, of which the following were the salient points. First, all companies operating in the member States of OPEC were required not to transfer their quotas of oil Or its derivatives, or part of those quotas, to the racist regime in South Africa. Secondly, all oil contracts must be so controlled as to ensure that the buyer delivers the totality of the purchase to the final destination stipulated in the sales contract. When the refining process is carried out in another refinery the buyer is required to obtain the prior agreement of the seller. The buyer, or the tanker, is required not to unload any part of the shipment for sale in any of the spot markets during the course of the journey to the port of destination specified in the bill of lading. Thirdly, as it is known that oil tankers unload their cargo in South African ports, adopt various measures to conceal their navigation course and produce false papers in connection with their course, it is possible to require the captain to produce within a period of not less than one year official documents proving the ports of call of the tanker. Contravening tankers are prohibited from shipping oil and their name may be put on the black list. Fourthly, in case of companies and tankers contravening the embargo laws we suggest the imposition of sanctions ranging from banning the supply of the remainder of the shipment under contract or putting the name on the black list, or both, depending on the type and magnitude of the contravention. In accordance with General Assembly resolution 37/69 J, of 9 December 1982, on the imposition of an oil embargo against South Africa, the General Assembly authorized the Special Committee against Apartheid to appoint a group of experts to prepare a thorough study and report on all aspects of the question of oil and oil products exports as a basis for the consideration of national and international measures to ensure the effective implementation of the embargo imposed of policies declared by oil-producing and oil-exporting countries with regard to the supply of oil and oil products to the racist regime" in South Africa. Kuwait had the honour of presiding over the meetings of the international Group of Experts and a comprehensive report was submitted on ways and means necessary to strengthen ~~e present embargo and increase its effectiveness. The report referred to the fact that the cQuntries members of OPEC in general, and the members of the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries in particular, market most of their oil exports through long-term contracts and agreements. All sales contractG include provisions prohibiting the supply of their oil to certain countries and usually sales contracts include annexes containing the names of countries to which oil may be exported. The two main countries suuject to sales prohibition are normally the racist regimes of South Africa and Israel. Despite all these measures, South Africa continues to acquire oil by vatious means, in particular through an international network of Western transnational corporations, especially those that have permanent interests in South Africa and have invested widely in the oil and energy sectors, for example by establishing costly factories and plants.to extract oil from coal. In addition, the increased price of oil in the 1970s led to the extraction of oil in areas where it had hitherto been considered uneconomic. This meant the expansion of oil production outside OPEC, especially in those countries that sympathized and co-operated wit.'l the apartheid regime in South Africa, which made it easier for the latter to acquire oil and its derivatives. The Group of Experts considered that it was possible to iIIprove and strengthen the oil eJlbargo in two ways. pirst, there should be a plan of action to co-ordinate all the national and international aeasures in order to strengthen the present ellbargo and identify other J1easures for its expansion. secondly, a aechanlslI or body should be established to follow up, co-ordinate and control the i1!lplemen~tionof the ellbargo lIeasures. Undoubtedly, one of the most appropriate things that the international COilBUnity can do in support of the legitimate struggle of the people of South Africa is to impose comprehensive mandatory sanctions against the racist regime in South Africa. It should also take measures against those countries which continue to maintain relations and links with the racist regime in South Africa. The General Assembly has declared that apartheid is a crime against humanity and that the apartheid regime is one of terror and des);lC?tism. Undoubtedly, the latest acts carried out by the racist regime in South Africa are the best example of th:l.s. Mr. Anthony Lewis, in an article in The New York Times on the carrying out of the death sentence on the poet Maloise, said: (Spoke in English) -The Government- - that is, of South Africa - -granted a stay in AugustJ it appeared to be responding to new evidence and to world-wide appeals for clemency. Then, suddenly, it proceeded with the execution. -The night before the hanging, soldiers surrounded the home of the poet's mother in Soweto, where she was holding a vigil, and fired tear gas into it. The next morning officipls would not let her see her son before he died. -Mrs. Maloise is an elderly non-political woman who said she once 'felt sympathy' for those in power. But now she said: 'This Government is cruel. It is really, really, cruel'.- (The New York Times, 21 October 1985, p. A21) This last paragraph was the quotation of the day in Wednesday's issue of The New York Times. However, it is the quotation of every day for the indigenous majority of South Africa who are suffering under the evil regime of apartheid. (continued in Arabic) Kuwait salutes the struggle of the oppressed people of SOuth Africa under the leadership of its national liberation movements. Kuwait believes that the struggle to eliminate apartheid and its evil is a struggle between good and evil, freedom and slavery. We have no doubt that freedom and good will ultimately be victorious and that.the proud majority will regain its legitimate, inalienable rights to freedom and independence. Mr. ZAIN (Malaysia): After nearly 40 years of debate on the apartneid policies of the SOuth African regime, my delegation does not propose to spend time in reiterating our condemnation of apartheid or our steadfst support for the South African liberation movements. Nor shall I refer to the callous and casual cruelties being perpetrated each and every day by the Pretoria regime. These and other developments are really quite clear from the reports of the Special Committee, as well as other reports - clear, that is, for all those who wish to see and who do not want to obfuscate the situation by calling for so-called first-hand or more detailed reports. Rather, my objective in these remarks is to deal with the question of sanctions and to ask, if not in SOuth Africa, where, if not now, when? Por this purpose it is necessary to state once more that apartheid is a unique moral evil in the contemporary world. It is not merely the denial of certain human rightsJ it is, in theory and in practice, a political and social system of institutionalized racism which is rigorously and cruelly enforced for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by the white minority over the black majority and of systematically oppressing the latter. Apartheid makes slaves of black, Coloured and Indian South Africans. Apartheid is, in a very real sense, the contemporary version of nazism. To condemn this evil, as all of us in this Hall have done, is easy. words, indeed, are cheap. But even in terms of mere words, my delegation asks what is the objective of all this condemnation. Is the objective merely that somehow the , apartheid regime will be a little less racist, a little less repressive; that instead of killing some 700 people, as it has done in the last year, it will kill ·only· 70, that instead of imprisoning thousands, it will arrest maybe only a few hundred, preferably without too .ouch publicity and prsf~rably not including young children; that it will spend maybe a little more on black education, improve a little more the facilities in the shanty towns, pay black miners a little more, implements its policy of forced population removals a little less harshly, enforce its Pass Laws a little less rigorously, and so on? Or is the objective the creation of a non-racial, democratic and united South Africa in which all citizens have equal rights, including the most fundamental right of all, the right to vote? All Governments have condemned apartheid, but not all Governments have categorically declared what the objective of their condemnation is. Unless there can be agreement on objective, any discussion on means and processes is quite meaningless and becomes an e~ercise in obfuscation and deception. My Government is still to hear that the objective of all Governments represented in this hall is in fact the creation of a non-racial, democratic and united South Africa. Instead, while we hear condemnations in regretful tones of apartheid, we also hear statements, in more revealing language, that South Africa is a strategic partner to maintain stability. We also know that huge profits are being made by corporations in South l~frica. We also surmise unspoken argumentEi of kith and kin. We also hear that South Africa is a complex society of many minorities, of which incidentally whites surprisingly constitute a single minority. We also hear the South Africa regime, this regime of the white master race, described as "reformist". Let us be clear. If democracy's ally in southern Africa is racism, (Mr. Zain, Malaysia) if capitaliSJI puts profits above elementary principles of human dignity, and if white lives are more valuable than black lives, then the J1K)ral sta.ture of those aJIOIl9 the. who talk about dellOcracy, about freed01'l, about human rights, is deeply tarnished. Let us be clear. We have heard these colonialist refrains about cOllplex situations, whether in India, in Kenya, in Zimbabwe or elsewhere. Let us also be 9lear that the so-called reforllS announced by the South African regime. are nothing more than cosmetic and token gestures intended to placate its apologists abroad. The abolition of the Immorality and Mixed Marriages Act, the ratification of a new constitution giving the vote - to separate and powerless parliamentary chambers - to Coloured and Indian South Africans but not to the overwhelming majority who are black South Africans, vague statements about citizenship rights or about a review of its policy of forced removals, and other cosmetic changes dealing with where black South Africans may sit in parks or go for their entertainment, these have not touched the essentials of the apartheid•.system. Indeed, they were never intended to be. Does one reform Nazism? No. Like Nazism apartheid cannot be reformed. Root and branch, it must be dismantled and destroyed. It is in the context of all this that my Government feels compelled to address, with regret, the policy of a Member State with whom we have very warm and friendly relations. We do so not to point a finger but because that policy is essential to the question at issue. I refer to the policy of so-called constructiv~ engagement. It is a policy better described as "destructive appeasement". Like the famous Munich policy of appeasement, it has been an unmitigated disaster, not so much because it has failed to change or persuade the South African authorities t~ change the essentials of apartheid by one iota, but, even more, because it has sent the signal to them, namely, that South Africa's most powerful ally, whose policies can make a difference, will not, in the final analysis, act in any serious way to hurt them. What, indeed, have been the practical results of this policy, which I must insist on calling by its proper name, "destructive appeasement"? First, the apartheid regime has felt no inhibition to declare that it will never accept a non-racial, democratic and united South Africa. Mr. Botha's statement of 15 August has made that clear beyond any equivocation. Second, it has been emboldened to embark on its current massive wave of arrests, repression and violence, includ~ng violence it has purposely instigated. (Mr. zain, Malaysia) Third, it has felt encouraged to continue its illegal occupation of Namibia, all the more so after the concept of linkage was introduced, which it was not slow to embrace. Fourth, it has engaged in open invasion, sabotage and destabilization of neighbouring states as well as support for dissident elements in those States. Fif~h, it has categorically reaffirmed its denial of any serious means of open, legal and non-violent opposition to the apartheid regime. Again Mr. Botha' s statement of 15 August is a categorical affirmation of this. I should like, if I may, to deal a little with this last point. From Sharpeville in 1960 up to recent events which led to the proclamation of the emergency, every serious black resistance to apartheid ~s been met by the South African regime with massive violence and repression, the detention of leaders inclUding those engaged in peaceful protest, so-called treason trials, the use of brute force to break strikes, the arrests of demonstrators and of students - inclUding many under 10 years of age - the banning of meetings and political organizations and student bodies, deportations, evictions, forced removals of communities, house arrests, intimidation, harassment, and so on. Again going back to Sharpeville, the South African security forces have shot and killed unarmed demonstrators in hundreds, and evidence of torture and of inhuman and degrading punishment is well documented. The United Democratic Front, whose offices were raided and all of whose principal leaders have been arrested and face a charge of high treason, bave merely advocated passive resistance. High treason, in fact, is any serious attempt to resist and change the apartheid system, inclUding attempts blr peacful means. In the face of all this, what are the black nationalist movements expected to do? While on the SUbject of avenues for change, a further comment is necessary. The South African regime, in a bid for understanding from its apologists, has used the code-word -terrori.- , to which all Governaenta are naturally opposed. To this, I wish to say the following: First, the South African regille equates any act of violence with terrori_. This, of course, would aake the A1Ierican War of Independence itself a terrorist act, to take this one-uaJllPle. Second, the nationalist JIO'Ieaents hav4t, by and large, engaged in very few act. of sabotage. Further, the policy of the African Hatic....l congress (ARC) MS been that it would carry out acts of sabotage only when it was certain that no innocent bystander would be hurt. It was only recently that the MC announced a change in that policy, but only that, wbile it would no longer sake sure that no innocent bystander would be burt, it was still its poticy not to undertake indiscrillinate acts of sabotage. For a political party whicb was founded in 1912, earlier than most of the political parties which now fora the Gover~nts represented in this hall, and which has been denied any peaceful seans of prOWlOting change, its restraint is surely extraordinary. Third, and !lOst iJIportant of all, who, indeed are the terrorists? The nationalist ROVeDents or the SOuth African r6giae itsti1f, with all its apparatus of force, which has killed thousands of people, arrested even aore thousands, tortured, deported, harassed and inqarcerated people, whose criae is nothing 80lre than to resist a policy Which is universally acknowledged as IIOrally evil? Finally on this utter, l~t lie also say that to be sanctillOnious about violence in the circWlstances of South Africa, particularly in the faae of the violence committed by the apartheid regime, to equate oppressor and victim, is either to be wilfully blind or, worse, is mere cynicis~ and hypocrisy. (Mr. zain, Mal!y8ia) The situation, therefore, is first, that the SOuth African r'gime is categorically and adamantly committed to -aintaining and enforcing apartheid; and, secona, that there is no avenue for peaceful change in SOuth Africa. These are inescapable facts. What, then, are we to do? Private and gentle persuasion, as epitomiZed by the policy of -destructive appease1lent- having not only failed to change the attitude of the South African regime but actually encouraged it in its intransigence, it Is clear to ~ delegation that the only peaceful way forward is to embark seriously on sanctions and divestment and the boycott of south African goods. The General Assembly, by very large majorities has urged, and a significant number of Member States have igp1eaented, a policy of full mandatory sanctions against South Africa. The Security Council and a number of other states have also agreed on some limited aanotioins, albeit without invoking Chapter VII of the Charter and with many qualifications and much apologetic hand-wringing. All these have not been enough - and for perfectly obvious reasons _ Only when those who matter, who maintain iBpOrtant political, economic, military, intelligence and other relations with SOuth ~frica, act decisively or at least show that they are willing to act decisively, will sanctions have any serious meaning_ However, comprehensive mandator.y sanctions have been strongly resisted by those whose policies can make a difference, and in that connection I wish to offer the following comments. First, sanctions are a serious matter and, when undertaken, must have a serious objective, and there must be a serious plan for achieving that objective. They are not to be undertaken as an exercise to placate public opinion or to divert or blunt more serious sanctions. Weak, cosmetic sanctions with no follow-through plan of action are worse than useless. To those who oppose serious sanctions, I say, "Be consistent, then. Do not embark on any sanctions. Do not take pride in, but rather apologize for, the inconsistency of embarking on any sanctions." Secondly, the purpose of sanctions is to signal to the South African authorities that we mean business and, thirdly, this is possible only if the sanctions, even if they are limited, in fact bite and begin to destabilize the South African Government. specif~cally, in present circumstances, a graphic demonstration of seriousness would be for Governments to take action which would ensure that their banks did not bailout the South African banks in their present crisis and for Governments not to stand in the way of the divestment campaign. Fourthly, it is essential to indicate a willingness and a timetable for tightening the screws if there is no. movement in the desired direction, which must surely include a commitment by the South African regime to the establishment of a non-racial, democratic and united South Africa as an indispensable first step, from which it follows that it must lift the current emergency and negotiate with recognized black leaders - therefore requiring the release of political prisoners, including, above all, Nelson Mandela. (Mr. Zain, Malaysia) Fifthly, it is worthwhile, perhaps, to deal here with the argument that sanctions will hurt the black people of South Africa. The answer is that we must stop being patronising. If black leaders say, as they have, that they support sanctions - indeed, Chief Luthuli, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, called for an international boycott of South Africa as long ago as the 1950s - we are not the ones to know better. These is also an element of hypocrisy in being so concerned about the welfare of blacks, when we know the sufferings they have had to endure for so long. Sixthly, my delegation asks this. If, as has sometimes been argued, sanctions are difficult to apply in relation to South Africa because its economy is strong, is it t~en being suggested that sanctions, as a weapon of the international COlununity which is provided for in the Charter, are to be applied only to weak States? If sanctions are not applicable in the circumstances of South Africa, when are they ever appropriate? I ask, therefore, if not in South Africa, where~ if not now, when? Having witnessed so much bloodshed already in South Africa in the past 25 years and the periodic spasms of resistance, savagely put down because of the military might of the South African apartheid regime, there are some who believe - and among them some who hope - that the present spasm will also be suppressed, no doubt, unfortunately, with greater bloodshed and violence than ever. But we have all witnessed the decreasing options and the increasing violence with each fresh resistance. The South African regime is working hard to instigate violence and to destroy the middle ground of moderation and non-racism. It hopes to create a situation in which the choice will be between a white so-called democratic regime and a black so-called radical regime, in the full expectation that some will choose what they consider to be the lesser evil of racism as compared with radicalism. Indeed, I regret to say that there is some glimmer of that situation even now. It is for us here to prevent its developing and to insist that the choice is between democracy and racism, freedom and suppression, justice and might. The road ahead will not be easy. I remain amazed at the patience, forbearance and good feeling of the South African liberation MOvements, which are best epitomised in these lines by a South Africa poet: ·Where the rainbow ends There's going to be a place, brother, Where the world can sing all sorts of songs, And we're going to sing together, brother, You and 1, though you're white and I'm not. It's going to be a sad song, brother, Because we don't know the tune. And it's a difficult tune to learn. But we can learn, brother, y~u and I. There's no such tune as a black tune. There's no such tune as a white tune. There's only music, brother, Where the rainbow ends." It is our business here at the United Nations to act, and to act now, so that South Africa may soon reach ~~at place "Where the rainbow ends". Mr. KULAWIEC (Czechoslovakia) (interpretation from Russian): The struggle for the complete elimination of colonialism, racism and aparth Qeen pursued by the Uni~ed Nations ever since its foundation in 1945. Neverthel~ more than 20 million Africans, the indigenous population of the Republic of Sou Africa, are being subjected to harsh and cruel racial discrimination and exploitation. (Mre Zain, Malaysia) Developaents in SOUth Africa over tbepast year have shown that the living conditions of the black population have continued to deteriorate. There has also been an escalation of violence, which has cost the lives of hundreds of completely innocent people. The establishJlent of for_lly autonOlllOus enclaves within SOuth Africa further increases the separation of blacks and whites. The IIOWlting aggressiveness of the apartheid regime against neighbouring sovereign States has caused deep alarm in the international eam.unity. Those actions by the south African regiJlle have also resulted in legitiaate counter-aeasures by the .any-million-strong population of SOUCb Africa, and in increasing conde.nation by the international collllUnity. The Government of SOUth Africa has not manifested a desire to find the the mask of liberalism, it has shifted its ground from bogus constitutional reforllS, which serve merely to camouflage the illl'lementation of the policy of apartheid, to the prcx:lamation of a state of eaergency. This measure is nothing other than a desperate attempt to halt the irreversible national liberation JIOvement. The army and the police have been given broad powers to put down any unrest and any demonstrations against the racist regime. In the two months that have elapsed since the proclamation of the state of emergency, hundreds of people have been killed, thousands have been thrown behind bars. The racists have not even stopped at using gun-fire on children. In connection with the tension in • South Africa since the proclamation of the state of emergency the African media have warned against the intensified aggressiveness of agents provocateurs ot the South African secret services and the Americ~n Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) who ,are doing thei~ utmost to subvert the movement against apartheid. The harsh policy of internal oppression pursued by the Pretoria regime has led a number of countries to the brintt of true civil war, with all the consequences that that entails, posing a serious threat to international peace and security. Through its barbarous acts the Pretoria regime has made a mockery of the Unite~ Nations, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, the Organization of African Unity Q~~r indeed, world public opinion 8S a whole, which has been calling for the prompt ending of apartheid for all time, since it is the most ignominious manifestation of racial discrimination, an open crime against mankind and a gross violation of human rights. Together with the oppression of its own population, the South African Government has been engaging in large-scale acts of aggression against neighbouring countries, as evidencad by the attempt made by the SOuth African commando unit to destroy the oil facilities in Cabinda, in Angola, the terrorist attack in another independent State, Botswana, and also the recent gross violation of the sovereignty have been resolutely condemned by the security Council, as was the attempt by South Africa to impose Cl neo-colonialist solution to the Namibian question by establishing a puppet government in Na_ibia in such a way as to be able to continue its merciless exploitation of that country and its utilization of Namibia as a beach-head for acts of aggression against neighbouring countries. It would be impossible for SOuth Africa to iqtlement its policy of .~partheid were it not for the generous, comprehensive and systematic assistance the Pretoria regime has been receiving from the United States, Israel and certain western countries. It is true that we have heard in this Ball utterrances by representatives of Western countries condemning the South African Government's policy of apartheid. None the less, their economic and even military co-operation with the racist SOuth African regime continues unabated, notwithstanding the arms embargo imposed against SOuth Africa. The United States and its allies continue to seek in south Africa the pursuit of their own economic interests exclusively. Approximately one-half of the strategic raw materials needed by the Western countries, such as cobalt, chrome, manganese and the platinum group of metals, is imported from South Africa by those countries. In return, the latter invest mas~ively in SOuth Africa. Capital investments by the United States in SOuth Africa to date are estimated at the very minimum to be $15 billion; by the united Kingdom, £12 billion; by the Federal Republic of Germany~ over 6 billion marks. Given this situation, it is not surprising that at the previous session of the General Assembly, for example, during the votes on seven draft resolutions on apartheid the United States cast five negative votes and abstained in the voting twice; the United Kingdom, two negative votes and abstained in the voting five times; the Federal Republic of Germany, two negative .~tes and abstained in the voting twice. Profitable trade relations is the main reason why the United States and some of its allies oppose the adoption of mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa. There are no grounds at all for the argument whereby economic sanctions would prove to be harmf~l to South African workers. In reality, the situation is quite different. Only a complete break in any relations, particularly economic relations, with South Africa is capable of striking a serious blow at the apartheid regime, a regime which, in the opinion of the majority-of the inhabitants of South Africa and, indeed, ef the international community as a whole, cannot be reformed but must be completely eliminated. International imperialism has been developing its relations with South Africa in the political and military spheres alsoo A most irresponsible step in this regard is the establishment of a nuclear potential in South Africa precisely by certain imperialist States and Israel. This has made it possible for SOuth Africa, which is not a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), to produce nuclear weapons. The result of this comprehensive co-operation is the de facto formation of an informal military-politieal bloc in southern Africa, including certain imperialist countries and South Africa. This bloc is aimed against the national liberation movements and the African continent as a whole. International imperialism is thereby establishing an important military and political beach-head in the southern hemisphere which, SOuth African General Roberts has called a ·~~TO aircraft carrier·. As long ago as 1963 our country broke off diplomatic, economic, cultural and all other types of relations with the South African regime, it has been consistently and unswervingly following a policy of boycott of South Africa. We resolutely condemn the terror unleashed against the Africans after the proclamation of the state of emergency and also the aggressive actions of South Africa against neighbouring States and its continuing illegal occupcticn of Namibia. (Mr. KUlawiec, Czechoslovakia) we demand the unconditional release of all politicai prisoners, first and foremst that of IMr. Nelson Mandela, Chairman of the African National Congress of South Africa (ANte). ,As in the past, we shall 3trive uncompromisingly in the future to ensure the implemenb,tion of any lleasures proPosed by the United Nations and its organs, as well as by oth'lr organizations to bring about the speedy elimination of colonialism, racism and apartheid in southern Africa. Uong with the majority of the to!Qrld's peoples, we share the view that the policy of racist South Africa poses a threat to international peace and security and that the current situation in southern Africa demands the adoption of comprehensive sanctions against SOuth Africa, as provided for in Chapte.r Vl"!' (t.,; the Charter of the United Nations. The Czechoslovak SOCialist Republic wishes to place on record its complete solidarity with the peoples of South Africa and of Namibia, and with their national liberation movements under the leadership of the African National Congress and the South west Africa People's Organization whi.ch are fighting against racial discrimination and colonialism. We are providing and shall continue, through Czechoslovak governmental and non-governmental organizations, to provide every kind of assistance until their final victory. Czechoslovakia fully supports the appeal addressed by th~ Assembly at its thirty-ninth session to the international community' to provide assistance and support to the front-line States to enable them to defend ~~~ir sovereignty and territorial integrity against the acts of ag9reseion~ the political and economic pressure, and the threats of the SOuth African racist regime. The Czechoslovak delegation will continu~ to support all measures aimed at bringing about the genuine elimination of apartheid. (Mr. Kulawiec, Czechoslovakia) Mr. ~RANI (Pakistan): The United Nations has been seized of the issue fitti~, if, on this fortieth anniversary of its creation, the United Nations could take concrete measures finally to eliminate apartheid. Racj.al discri.inaUon in any fora is repugnant to the fundamental spiri t and principles of Islu. Pakistan was, therefore, one of the first Member states to raise the issue of apartheid ~n -the United Nations. '. Apartheid was created to justify the continued colonization of southern Africa. It violates all the accepted norms of hwaan rights, inclUding the purposes and principles of the United Ratione Charter. During the past 40 years, the United Nations has repeatedly coradentned apartheid as a crime, as a blot on the conscience of mankind, and as a threat to international peace and security. Despite the consensus of. the international coBlllunity, apartheid has survived. Indeed, its oppressive character has intensified even as illusory -reforms- have been proclaimed by the Pretoria regime. It is sad that great demc~ratic nations, which champion the cause of human freedom and dignity so vigorously elsewhere, have been prepared to compromise their principles in exchange for raw materials or profits gained from the cruel exploitation of the majority population of South Africa. There can be no ·constructive engagement- w.ith a system which is so manifestly exploitative, oppressive and evil .. The explicit or implicit support extended to th~ racist regime by some powerful States has encouraged it to intensify its oppression domestically, to frustrate the national liberation of Namibia, and to launch repeated acts of aggression against neighbouring States, including Angola, Mozambique and Botswana. As Bishop Desmond TUtu stated yesterday, -certainly the support of this racist policy is racist-. The majority population of South Africa has borne the ignominy and oppression of aparthei!! for too long_ Indeed, in the guise of reform, the apartheid system has, if anything, become even more cruel and exploitative. .Even passive protest has drawn a fierce response, as in Sharpeville, Soweto, Uitenhage and other townships. Since early this year, the people of South Africa have been engag€'d. in a determined struggle to oppose apar~~eid. That struggle enjoys the popular support of peoples throughout the world. Pretoria has reacted with more than characteristic brutality tc the urban protests which have spread across the South African cities. However, even the imposition of a ruthless state of emergency, mass arrests and indiscriminate police brutality have failed to stem the tide of freedom. The heroic sacrifices that ha~e been made have brought closer the day when apartheid and colonialism will be eliminated from southern Africa. The people of Pakistan grieve for the hundreds of innocent persons, especially the women and children, who have been murdered or maimed by the Pretoria police for demanding their birthright of justice and equality in their own homeland. The cowardly and vindictive shooting of children and the destruction of the home of Mrs. ~~ndela epitomize the moral bankruptcy of the racist regime. It is quite evident t~at t~e white minority Government. posse,sses no credentials to represent the ~ople of South Africa, with whom it is at w,ar.. Their representatives are the African National Congress of South Africa and the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania, and leaders like Mr. Nelson Mandela. At this fortieth anniversary session, the General Assembly has a moral and historic responsibility to devise effective measures for the elimination of apartheid. It is now evident that the international cQmmuniey is in a position to influence the outcome of the struggle being waged against a~artheid in South Africa. Contrary to certain prognoses, the South African economy is vulnerable to the external economic environment. The imposition of sanctions can be a very effective way of persuading the racist regime°to give up its obduracy. The majority population of SOuth Africa and the front-line states are more than prepared for any sacrifices tt.'at sanctions aga~nst South Africa might entail. It is notable that the logic &ld efficacy of sanctions as an instrument against apartheid now enjoy universal r~cognition. Pakistan also notes with satisfaction the voluntary measures against South Africa imposed even by those who '0 had previously questioned the effectiveness of sanctions. Nevertheless, Pakistan is of the view that the measures so fe~ recommended by the Security Council and implemented by some of its permanent members are only the first step. To be fully effective, sanctions against South Africa must be universal and comprehensive. Mor~over, it would be most unfortunate if the limited measures adopted so far were to be used merely to neutralize the current world-wide public demand for effective action against apartheid. Pakistan therefore once again urges that the Security Council, in accordance with the warnings contained in its own resolutions, should speedily agree to impose comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa. (Hr. Noorani, Pakistan) The security Council must also recognize that the emerging situation in SOuth Africa poses a grave threat to international peace and securitYe It must therefore contemplate other measures provided in Chapter VII of the Charter to contain the aggressive proclivities of the policy of apartheid and to secure its early eliRlinatione Por.their part, Member States can contribute to the struggle against apartheid by extending moral and material assistance to the SOuth African national liberation movements and enlarging the scope of Pretoria's isolation, in the political, economic and other fieldse In this context, Pakistan supports the adoption of an international convention against apartheid in sportse Pakistan considers that the specific demands made by the recent Commonwealth Conference are a reasonable basis for a transition to democratic and majority government in South Africae We hope that Pretoria will respond positively to these demands. This may constitute the last opportunity to bring an end to apartheid through a process of dialogue. If the racist regime remains unmoved, it is inevitable that the majority population of South Africa and its leadership will have no option but to intensify their just struggle against apartheid by any and all means. The explosion that would follow in southern Africa will lead to widespread bloodshed and suffering and produce grave and far-reaching consequences for regional and global peace and securitYe The struggle for liberation and self-determination has started in earnest in South Africa. Pakistan stands ready to participate in any international measures and to provide all moral and material help needed by the oppressed and valiant people of South Africa to facilitate the inevitable triumph of their struggle against apartheid. The meeting rose at 1.35 p.m.