A/40/PV.56 General Assembly
14. REPORT OF ~ INTERNATIONAL A'roMIC ENERGY AGENCY (a) NOTE BY THE SECRBTARY-GENERAi. 'l'RANSMITTING THE REPORT OF THE AGENCY (A/40/576 and Corr.l) (b) DRAFT RESOLUTION (A/40/L.8) !!!.e PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish): In accordance with the decision taken by the Assembly at the plenary meeting held yesterday afternoon, the Assem&ly'will nOW begin its consideration of agenda item 14, entitled -Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency·. The Assembly has before it a note by the Secretary-General transmitting the report of the Agency (docwnent AI40/576 and Cort 0 1) I invite the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mr. Bans alix, to pr.esent the report of the Agency for the year 1984. Mr. BLIX (International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)): May I begin by thanking you, Mr. President, and the I..3Sembly for your kindness in allowing me to make my presentation this morning, despite your heavy schedule. Since its inception 40 years ago the United Nations has h~d to face the consequences of man's conquest of nuclear energy. In the first resolution it ever adopted, the General Assembly in January 1946 set up a United Nations Commission to consider problems arising from the discovery of atomic energy. At that time there were no nuclear-power reactors in the world and only one nuclear-weapon State. The situation today, with some 370 power reactors producing electricity and some 50,000 nuclear warheads in five different States, marks the success and the failure ... of the world to come to grips with the challenges of the new technology. Since 1955, when the first United Nations Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy was held in Geneva, the two--pronged approach of free a~cess to nuclear energy technology for peaceful purposes and cOm.1tments against military development has been pursued. This approach of actively assisting the peaceful uses and of contributing to impeding military uses also characterizes the Statute of the International Atomic'Energy Agency (UBA) which was set up in 1957 as an autonomous body with direct links to the security Council and to the General Assembly. A rational approach to the world:s energy problems continues to call for the promotion of nuclear power, and a rational approach to the world's security problems continues to call for the dismantling of its suicidal nuclear weapons capacity and the prevention of the spread of such weapons capacity to further countries. The annual report of lAEA for 1984 is now before the General Assembly. In my presentation today I should like to call your attention to some matters in the nuclear field, to emphasize some of our activities and to supplement our report for 1984 with information from the current year. Before reporting in g~eater detail, let me very briefly mention some of the most important points. First,. despite a zero real growth budget, the lAEA in 1984 expanded its promotional activities, notably co-operation with developing countries, and it continued to strengthen safeguards activities. Both developments were made possible thanks to savings in some areas and increased ef~iciency. Secondly, last February an agreement was signed pursuant to the voluntary offer of the Soviet Union to accept IAEA safeguards on some of its peacefUl nuclear installations, and the first inspection under that agreement took place in August of this year. Thirdly, in August-September of this year at the Third Review Conference of the States Parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) the lAEA presented substantive reports, parti~ular1y on its work in the fields of the transfer of peaceful nuclear technology and on safeguards. The Conference reached a conse~sus on-a final declaration'which contains a number of points of direct relevance to the Agency. Fourthly, in September at the lAEA General Conference, China announced its intention to place some of its civilian nuclear facilities under !AEA safeguards. I turn now to the development of nuclear power and the Agency's work in this field. During 1984 the total installed nuclear power capacity in the world increased by 17 per cent, the largest annual increase since the beginning of the large-scale introduction of nuclear power in the early 1970s. Nuclear power today accounts for some 13 per cent of the world's electricity and by the year 2000 it is expected to generate around 20-25 per cent. Itl a world where economic development and growth are resuming and where fossil fuels pose particular environmental problems in the form of acid rain and production of carbon dioxide, nuclear power, I submit, will be viewed increasingly as a chief and indispensable option to meet growing demand for electricity. While primary energy consumption has been stagnating, increase in the demand for electricity is parallel to the increase in gross domestic production. Some recent developments have contributed to making the economic picture for nuclear power even more positive than a few years ago, for instance, new types of more efficient nuclear fuel and longer cycles of operation. In most places nuclear power retains a clear economic edge over coal. Standardization in design of plants, streamlined regulatory procedures and rigid management controls are ways of keeping costs under control• (Mr. Blix, IAEA) The whole question of financiilg nuclear po~er plants, however, has beCOllle a major constraint, not only for developing'count~ies,but fot some industrialized countries as well, because of the high tnitial capital investment required. In the nuclear case, we are talking about a total capital cost, including interest during construction, for a plant in the 600-700 megawatts range of the order of $1.5~2 billion. The lAEA is not a financing institution, but it has been asked by its members and by the Third Re~iew Conference of the NPT to begin devoting more attention to this particular obstacle to the int~oduction of nuclear power by studying new approaches and bringing together energy planning officials and financing institutions. One way of bringing nuclear power more within the reach of a larger number of developing countries or other areas with limited electrical grids, would be the use of small and medium-sized power reactors. The first phase of an Agency study on this subject has now been completed, showing that some 23 plant designs with an electrical output below 600 megawatts are available. However, discussion also continu~s regarding designs that would be simpler and have more inherent safety than those with which we currently have practical experience. These plants could be a longer-term option for both developing countries and industrialized countries from around the year 2000. A pre-condition for the further expansion of nuclear power is th~t it is safe and is so perceived by the public. The Three Mile Island accident seriously damaged confidence in nuclear power. The intense reporting of this accident - in which only in significant quantities of radioactive material escaped and in which no person was injured - flooded the media world and washed away years of dry statistics on the safe operation of nuclear plants. (Mr. Blix, IAEA) What is the real situatiOn regarding safety in nuclear.power .today? Some generalizations and objective 'data can be offered~ We now have an accumulated experience of some 3,600'reactor years without one·. single fatal radiation accident in a commercial -nuclear plant being reported. Accidents and incidents continue, of course,te-occur in nuclear plants, but as·the availability figures show, better maintenance and operation reduce their numbers- and limit their consequences. GoOd safety is good economy. Moreover, analysis of the Three Mile Island accident is beginning to provide the world with a more realistic view of the possible course and consequences of a core melt. The area. of the unknown is also being gradually clarified through research and experiments. The lAEA has a very active programme to assist members in their efforts to maintain and further enhance nuclear safety. The programme has been considerably ~xpanded in the last few years through an incident reporting system, through radiation protection advisory teams and through an International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group established this year. Responsibility for the management of spent fuel and ultimate disposal of radioactive waste, like responsibility for nuclear operational safety, naturally rests with the Governments permitting the activity which produces the waste. For several years now experts all over the world have been convinced that no scientific or technological breakthroughs are needed to achieve a disposal that remains safe during the long time-spans under which high-level waste will remain active. Indeed, to many people the complete isolation of high-level nuclear waste from the biosphere contrasts very favourably with the manner in which waste from other industries is handled. This, in their view, is an important argument in favour of nuclear power. However, in several countries, a fairly strong public opinion does not see the issue in this light and fears about nuclear waste are behind much of the opposition to nuclear power which we witness in those countries. (Mr. Blix, IAEA) ,t ~ • " .. ... _..-- Several me~Slirescan be .·expectedfavourably to influence· this public opinion. Most important, probably, is the actual construction of disposal installations of adequate capacity for intermediate storage of bigh-level waste· and preparation of sites or installations for .low and medium-level waste. Such installations and sites are, in "fact, under way in many countries. The dissemination of more factual information about the waste issue and about our ability to cope with it will also be 'useful. The !AEA is active in the waste field, ensuring that its membe~s exchange their practical oxperiences and that the cumulative experience of the membership is available to all and laid down in recommendations and guidelines. Before I close my remarks on the question of waste disposal I should report to you that, pursuant to its responsibilities under the London dumping Convention, the lAEA has prepared a revision of the "definition" of high-level wastes unsuitable for sea disposal and "recommendations· for other radioactive wastes. Considerable effort was devoted to this task, in which the Agency worked in close co-operation with other United Nations agencies and intergovernmental organizations. At the September meeting of the Contracting Parties to the London Convention, the majority of Parties agreed to a suspension of all dumping at sea of radioactive wastes until further studies and assessments have been made. The lAEA will be carrying out some of these assessments'as part of its responsibilities under the Convention. Promoting the transfer of nuclear energy technology for peaceful uses has remained important throughout the period following the United Nations Geneva Conference in 1955. As was recently emphasized by the Third Review Conference of the NPT, the lAEA is the main multilateral channel for this purpose. Nowhere is technology tr~nsfer more called for than in the developing countries, which need to bridge the technology gap. (Mr. Blix, lAEA) ~tal available resources for the technic~lassistanceand co-operation progranme in the !AEA almost doubled between 1980 and 1984, amounting to some $36 million 'in 1984.: Extrabudgetary sources have continued to provide some 25 per cent of the total funds received. I am also very happy to report that a . consensus on a 12 per cent increase annually in the target for the contributions ,to the Technical Assistance and Co-operation Fund for the three-year period 1987-1989 was reached recently in the Agency's Board of Governors. 'J~his gives the Agency a stable basis for the planning of its development co-operatilon prograllDe~ Naturally we hope that the Fund will, even more than in the past, be supplemented by further contrioutions for individual projects which cannot be financed through the Fund. I am pleased to report also that our technical co-operation activities in food and a~riculture are placing emphasis on Africa, thereby contributing to the United Nations system's efforts to face the emergency situation in Africa and to link relief. assistance to a process of sustainable development.* *Mrs. Castro de Barish (Costa Rica), Vice-President, took the Chair. (Mr. Blix, IAEA) " .",. In fact more than 40 Per cent of the.Agency·s technical co-operation projects in food and agriculture are in Africa.· Among these, a large-scale demonstration project in Nigeria has successfully shown the feasibility of using the sterile insect technique to control a·species of the tsetse and could serve as a model for otner African countries. I might also mention that isotope techniques are being promoted in seven African countries as a tool in the assessment and development of water resources. ·.Turning now to thelAEA safeguards functiob I should first report that 1984 and 1985 have been a period of further expansion and consolidation. AS the bulk of our safeguards work takes place under agreements made in pursuance of obligations under the NPT, the Agency reported at length on its safeguards activities to the Third NPT Review Conference. It was gratifying that the Final Declaration of the Conference reflected a consensus among Stat~s Parties on the need and usefulness of the safeguards system maintained by the IAEA. While there are certainly diverse views on various aspects of its implementation, on how it should be paid for, and so on, all agree that it is indispensable for maintaining nuclear trade, for facilitating the transfer of nuclear technology and for creating confidence. I might cite paragraph 11 of the Declaration in which: "The conference notes with satisfaction the improvement of lAEA safeguards which has enabled it to continue to apply safeguards effectively during a period of rapid growth in the number of safeguarded facilities. It also notes that the safeguards approaches are capable of adequately dealing with facilities under safeguards ••• " While the NPT Review Conference recommended the continued pursuit of the principle of universal application of lAEA safeguards to all peaceful nuclear activities in all States, the General Assembly of the united Nations and the IAEA General Conference have expressed particular concern about the nuclear capability (Mr. BIb, IAEA) of South Africa and Israel and have called specifically upon both those countries'i to place all their nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards. As regards South Africa, the IAEA Board of Governors and the Director General have been requested to contribute to the implementation of the relevant General Assembly resolutions in so far as they relate to the Agency's work. We continue to do so. For its part, the General Conference of the IAEA this year adopted a resolution on South Africa, inter alia, requesting all Member States to halt all nuclear co-operation with South Africa. While, regrettably, no progress has been made so far on the question of full-scope safeguards, discussions are proceeding with the South African authorities on the application of safeguards to a semi-commercial enrichment plant. As regards Israel, the General Conference of the IAEA, discussing the consequences of the Israeli military attack on the Iraqi nuclear research reactor, considered a letter containing undertakings on behalf of the Goverment of Israel and noted that by this letter: "Israel has cornmitteed itself not to attack peaceful nuclear facilities in Iraq, elsewhere in the Middle East, or anywhere else". The Conference further held that: ·the safeguards system of the IAEA brings evidence of and an opport"nity to review the peaceful nature of nuclear fa~ilities subject to such safeguards· and appealed to: ·competent international organs to take steps, in accordance with their mandates, to ensure the inviolability of peaceful nuclear facilities and to contribute thereby to the safe development of nuclear energy." This brings me to a point of some importance, namely, what - apart from the facilitation of trade and technology tran~fer - a State may expect from SUbmitting (Mr. Blix, IAEA) its whole nuclear progr~e or a nu.clear facUlty to safeguards and what is the nature of this submission: It is sOlletimes suggested that safeguards verfication and inspections are an inroad on the sovereignty of States. In my view this is an erroneous position. 8afe9Uards only take place upon the invitatin of a sovereign State and on the basis of an agreement made with it. It would be more appropriate to view the verification system as a service to a sovereign State wishing to create confidence which it cannot equally well create by itself•. When it avails itself of the service it will naturally expect to obtain the benefit that other States will be confident about the peacefUl operation of safeguarded installations and will act accordingly. SO far no generally ratified rules on the protection of nuclear installations from armed attack have emerged, relying upon safeguards or otherwise. However, a formula offering protection to nuclecr-power generating stations was included in 1977 in Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Convention and the matter has been discussed at length - though so far without result - in the context of the Conference on Disarmament. MOst recently the NP1' Review Conference, concerning itself with the question of attacks on safeguarded nuclear facilities, urged all States to co-operate towards a speedy conclusion offering protection. Such an appeal was also made in the General Conference of the IAEA. The NPT Review Conference devoted special attention to safeguards agreements made with nuclear-weapon States and urged the lAEA to take full advantage of the co-operation offered by those States in implementing the agreements. The Conference - as I mentioned a moment ago - also recommended the continued pursuit of the principle of universal application of IAEA safeguards to all peaceful nuclear activities in all States, no exception being made for nuclear-weapon States. (Mr. 81ix, DWA) The i~rtanceofsafeguards activities in nuclear-weapon states evidently does not lie 80 Much if! the field of non-proliferation.. It may be valuable, however, that there is assurance that particular facilities, imports from other States or, indeed, a whole programme in a nuclear-weapon State is confined to peaceful uses. Perhaps an even greater significance of safeguards in nuclear-weapon States lies in the fact that they give the world Cl precedent of verification of nuclear activities in those States and a first experience of such activities. That precedent is the more interesting now that a first inspection has been carried out in the Soviet Union besides those "hich have occurred in the United States, the United Kingdom and France. The intention of China to conclude a safeguards agreement is also to be welcomed. In this context it is pertinent to recall the 1985 Report of the Secretary-General of the united Nations, in which he states: -The Int~~na~ional Atomic Energy Agency has unique experience in monitoring non-prolifel:ution compliance and ensuring the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. This expertise could be built on and expanded to provide a monitoring capability for nuclear-arms agreements.- ("/40/1, P•..!) I fully share the Secretary-Generalls views and I should like to amplify by submitting that several lessons may be learnt from the operation of safeguards. First, if agreements on the non-acquisition of nuclear weapons required an elaborate on-site verification system we may safely assume that any agreements relating to actual nuclear disarmament will require reIiable verification, including some on-site inspection. Secondly, we must recognize that verification machinery can ne~er become an international police force. Where it discovers a breach or is unable to come to a conclusion it cannot physically interveneJ it can (Mr. 8liK, lAM) only ra!se the alara. Thirdly, we .can foresee tha~ 'in 1IOS~ cases v.rif1ca~lon is no~ likely ~o be allowed to operate all ewer a S~ate's ~erritory but only in identified ins~alla~ions or areas, eXt:.;'lptions perhaps being _de for various forllD of verification af~er challenge or collplain~. I should like to conclude by referring to the fortieth anniversary of the Uni'~d Nations. The United Nations and JIOs~ of the organiza~ins of the 'United Nations fully came into-being in the wue of the second World War and the public all ewer the world aupported thea and expected that they would facilitate co-op~aton and prevent conflict. Theta is no doubt that they often do this and that the institutionalized co-operation contributes to the gradual weaving of an international social fabric, the development of an international COBIunity. I have tried to show how the ~ contributes to this. (NI' 0 81ix, IABA) ~here is also no doubt, however, that the public in many countries has a feeling of frustration over international debates that seem never to result in' solutions and items that never end, over the same- matters being treated in different forums and over secretariats perceived to be too large, too well remunerated and unproductive. It would be a mistake on the part of both Governments and secretariats to ignore the impatience that underlies that criticism. Rather, it is their common task to ensure that organizations are constructively and efficiently used and that a reasonable distribution of work is arranged to prevent overlapping and repetition. The fortieth anniversary should in my view prompt new initiatives in that direction. In making efforts to increase efficiency and reduce costs, we must take care, however, not to damage the system. Being responsible for the secretariat of the IAEA, which is part of the United Nations common system, I feel duty bound to report to the Assembly that certain attitudes and actions are resulting in malaise and concern among the staff. If we are to run efficient organizations - as is rightly demanded of us - we must be able to rely on capable and motivated staff. There is no doubt that our ability to recruit and retain such staff is affected by conditions of employment. Good staff will gradually leave us if they feel subjected to unfair criticism or to arbitrary administrative action. Recent decisions and actions relative to the United Nations staff pension system and to the operation of the post adjustment system are seen by our staff not only as an erosion of their conditions of employment but as a challenge to the credibility of the common system and its established machinery. I cannot believe it was the intention to provoke experienced and dedicated staff into taking early retirement despite the fact that they could have had many years of productive service ahead of them. But such, I must report, is the case. (Mr. Blix, lAB) The ,possibUity of the loss of benefits and righte which staff had every reason to believe were acquired has led to that result. The General Asselllbly will this session again consider recommendations by the cOBlptent and expert organs of the collUlDn system, the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board and the International Civil Service Commission (ICSC), pertaining to the conditions of employment of staff. t shall not dwell on the details of those reconunendations but I feel bound to express my sincere hope that, when actions are taken, it will be borne in mind that they have a direct and profound effect on our ability to ensure the efficient and effective management of organizations. How Member Governments conduct themselves vis-a-vis one another, what initiatives they take, to what extent and how genuinely they seek to use the machinery of the international organizations to harmonize their actions and to solve their differences are no doubt decisive for the effectiveness of those organizations. However, morale and motivation in the secretariats also have some importance for the quality of documents or which discussions are based, for the organization of meetings, for the quality of technical assistance and for the execution of a multitude of decisions in all fields. I would therefore conclude by appealing tpat in the course of reViewing and modifying work and procedures in the United Nations family, renewed attention be given to the need to maintain a healthy human resources policy vis-a-vis the staff serving the family. Let me also, here in New York, express our appreciati~, to the Government of Austria, the host Government of the !AEA, for all the co-operation and assistance that it extends to the Agency.
I thank the Director
General for introducing the report v£ the International Atomic Energy Agency
(!AEA). The Assembly will continue consideration of that item on a subsequent date
to be announced in the Journal.
(!!r. Blix, !AEA)
ITEM 35 (continued)
POLICIES OF APARrHEID OF THE OOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(a) REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE AGAINST APAR'1'HEID (A/40/22 and Md.1-4)
(b) REPORT OF THE AD mc COMMI'l'TEE ON THE DRAFTING OF AN INTERNATIONAl, CDNVENTION
AGAINST APARTHEID IN SPORTS (A/40/36)
(c) REPORT OF THE SECRETARY-~F..AAL (A/40/;'80)
(d) REPORT OF THE ~tlECIAL POLITICAL COMMITTEE (A/40/805)
Mr. FARAH DIRIR (Djibouti): The tragic situation in south Africa has
defied any reasonable solution, as we see that the great major i ty of black Africans
is still kept under the cruel system of apartil~id and is denied its fundamental
human and political rights and liberties.
The Pretoria regime has arrogantly ignored all international appeals,
including decisions and resolutions of the General Assembly and the security
Council, that it redress its apartheid practices.
The black South African majority was never discouraged in the face of
that denial. It has continued its struggle in the most unfavourable environment
for the exercise of its inalienable rights to freedom and justice, and has met all
discouraging acts of oppression with enviable courage and determination.
The South African regime, confronted with acute resistance by the masses, has
not stopped at anything in escalating its obnoxious military and police violence
and intimidation. As a result, tension, violence and the mass destruction of life
and property have become the order of the day.
Thus, the spectre of apartheid has made the territory of SOuth Africa, despite
its human, animal and natural resources as well as its mineral wealth, one of the
unhappiest countries on earth.
Indeed, the policies of the apartheid regime of South Africa, seen against the
background of relentless terror and violence, have aroused intense international
outrage that warrants intensified international action to eradicate the evil of
apartheid.
Bow could the freedom-loving world tolerate a system that subjects the great
majority of its population to the most extreme humiliation of segregation, racial
discrimination and insult? How could a system that denies basic rights to those
who challenge it peacefully and that kills on a massive scale those who confront it
be allowed to flourish?
It is very sad indeed to realize that the international community - especially
that part of it with the leverage of influence - has become a mere bystander as
concerns the system of apartheid, under which the majority leaders of the black
community are imprisoned without trial and tortured and killed in prison, under
which schoolchildren and their parents are killed in the streets by the hundreds
and thousands, and under which innocent families are intimidated and their houses
broken into without any search warrant. In the face of such atrocities, it has not
been surprising to witness the huge ,r:orm of resistance and opposition welling up
within community organizations and among workers and their unions, students and
religious institutions as well as an increasing number of international calls to
inflict a heavy blow upon the apartheid system and its odious practices.
Tte south African regime, as obstinate as ever and refusing to be dissuaded
from its evil design, has lately imposed a state of emergency in the country, thus
creating an unprecendented reign of terror. As a result, violence has erupted and
spread to many African townships and has continued to escalate to an alarming
degree. The international community has been alarmed by the spectre of police
forces turning peaceful strikes by those various sectors of African society into
bloodbaths which have claimed thousands of innocent lives.*
*The President returned to the Chair.
(Mr. Farah Dirir, Djibouti)
We are certain that,. in spite of all this borror, the campaign of blatant
intimidation and harassment against mineworkers, the raids on various townships by
police forces, the arrest and detention of African students, scholars, mineworke.-:s
and politicians are reckless tactic" that are all doomed to complete failure. It
is our considered opinion that, since the international community has condemned
apartheid as a crime against humanity, it is high time that this world community
mobilized its forces to eliminate that evil system completely and support the
legitimate struggle of the SOuth Africa people to dismantle it and eventually
establish a democratic society.
we see signs that apartheid is on the decline, and we would like to believe
that the rising tide of international outrage is finally awakening the moral and
political forces of the world coDlUunity and causing it to call upon the SOuth
African regime to abandon its apartheid practices. We would also like to believe
that this new awakening will soon gather enough strength and momentum to bring
pressure to bear on the Pretoria regime to lift the state of emergency, release all
political prisoners and detainees, withdraw all emergency police forces from the
African townships and reform its policy of apartheid so that the African majority
can gain the basic necessities for their survival.
The international community, in its action against apartheid, should seriously
consider all possibilities for economic and military sanctions, leading to complete
disinvestment, a trade embargo, full and effective implementation of the arms
embargo against SOuth Africa and, especially, measures to prevent that country from
acquiring nuclear-weapon capability.
We reiterate once more that internationai condemnation of apartheid should be
translated into active support for the ongoing struggle against it and concrete and
tangible assistance to the liberation movements of the SOuth African people.
(KL. Farah Dirit, Djibouti)
I would 'not like to conclude my remarks without commendingthe efforts
depl-oyed by the Special COIIiIittee aga.inst.Apartheid, which, under the leadership of
Ambassador Garba of Nigeria, has drawn the attention of the international community
to' the serious situation in southern Africa. resulting from the aggressive and
oppressive policies of the South African regime. We welcome and note with
appreciation the active role that the Special C01IIIittee has played in gaining
world-wide support in the global mobilization of action against apartheid, as was
effectively expressed at regional and international conferences in Africa. Asia,
Europe and North AIIerica. We also co1lllllend the Special Committee's efforts in
promoting action on specific aspects of the campaign against apartheid in the
fields of sports, and women's, children's and workers' rights.
The delegation of Djibouti concurs with the Special Committee's conclusion and
accordingly supports its recommendations.
We call upon all Governments and other institutions of the international
community to co-operate in the efforts to mobilize effective solutions against the
SOuth African regime and to continue to provide all necessary assistance to the
people of SOUth Africa and their n~tional liberation movements.
We bel~eve that with international solidarity and active 8upport from all
freedom-loving nations the day will come when majority rule will triumph and the
African masses will decide thelr own destiny and win their constitutional right to
create a free, non-racial and democratic society.
Hr. PAZ AGUIRRE (Uruguay) (interpretation from Spanish) ~ Only a few days
after assuming the presidency of Uruguay, on 1 March 1985, a historic date that
marked the restoration of full institutionalized democracy in the country.
Dr. Julio Maria Sanguinetti sent a message to the secretary-General of the United
Nations in connection with the observance of the International Day for the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination. In his message the President of uruguay,
(Mr. Parah Dirir. Djibauti)
expressing the will of the Uruguayan people, confirmed our absolute rejection, on
mr,.l and political grounds that are basic to our philosophical and cultural
tradition, of the policy of racial discriaination.
Presideaat 8anguinetti, recalling that our country, which has been a party to
the International Convention on the Elimination of all PorllS of Racial
Discri.Jnation since 1968, was the first country to accept the competence of the
Cca.ittee established to receive individual complaintst Gonfirmed his Government's
strongest support for any action amed at putting an end to the policy of apartheid
and, indeed, any policy of racial discrimination. SUch policies do violence to our
mst deeply held humanist beliefs, which are based on the equality of all human
beings.
we are living at time of great upheavals in the history of mankind, a time
characterized by hatred and divisions among peoples, the proliferation of violence
in all its forlaS in many parts of the world and persistent disregard of the
fundamental principles of international coexistence.
In this world the development of science has been great, but that of our
conscience has been slight indeed, and there have been many oppressive systems that
violate human rights. At the same time, however, a view of human beings has
developed according to which all men are equal in dignity and have certain
inalienable rights, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion, to
use the words of the United Nations Charter. Violations of those rights continue
to affront the civilized conscience, but no legal system, no political system
anywhere in the world, would dare to deny that concept, fIllch less make an official
policy of and institutionalize absolute discrimination against human beings - with
a single exception: the South African regime.
In SOuth Africa a racist society has been created that makes the colour of a
-an's skin a decisive factor in whether he mayor may not not enjoy human rights.
(Mr. Paz Agui.;:re, Uruguay)
.•. 4 ','.
The. South African regime is a challenge ~. the oonscience of man~ind. It is an
overtpobjeotive, ai:~ogant aot of defiance that does not have to' be proved b~U8e
it is self-evident. In this divided world Governments and nations are in rare
unanimity regarding that repugnant situation.
On 11 Oc:tober of this year, in oonnection with the observance of the Day of
Solidarity with South African Political Prisoners, the Foreign Minister of uruguay,
Mr. Enrique Ig1esias, sent a message to the Cht\irman of the Special COllllittee
against Apartheid, Mr. Garba, in which he expressed once again his
Rvigorous repudiation of the policies of apartheid of the Government of south
Africa, the consequence of which has been the systematic violation of human
rights and which constitutes a orime against humanityR
and his
Rsolidarity with all those who, in their' fight against racism, have been and
continue to be the victims of persecution, imprisonment and tortureR.
This.offence against universalmor,ality,and .the basic values of civilization, -
also represents a serious threat to international peace and security, not only
because the situation in the country 'has become explosive and has involved
neighbouring countries with the repeated adoption of repressive measures and the
declaration of a state of emergency,' which has led to much bloodshed and hardship,
but also because it is a constant threat to those neighbouring countries.
It is, then, only appropriate and just that in the United Nations, this
universal ~orum, we should condemn the odious policies of apartheid. We are aware,
as other delegations have already said, of the practical limitations of the real
effectiveness of this condemnation and the difficulties involved in the final
abolition of these policies, but that should not discourage us from denouncing and
repudiating them, from keeping world public alert, from giVing the victims of
apartheid the moral support and the solidarity of all the peoples of the world. It
should not discourage us from trying to create a climate of deterrence against the
regime or from encouraging States and the Organization to take all lawful actions
to prevent the eruption of that volcano.
Uruguay believes that tenacious action through the united Nations will be
fruitful and will promote the adoption of sanctions which, though not bringing new
hardship to the majority in South Africa, will weaken the resistance of the white
minority to the changes required by justice. There must also be, inter alia, an
effective embargo on armaments and strategic materials, the denial of loans, the
prohibition of new investment and the suspension of cultural and sports relations.
At the same time other States must be called upon to offer the kind of humanitarian
assistance needed by those who are now SUffering from the harsh repression of the
racist regime.
In this connection it should be pointed out that the new democratic Government
in Uruguay has decided, within its competence, to put into practice the various
. _ .
resolutions·thathave been..,adopted-by-bodieswithin the United Nations system. The
constitutional Government of my country is determined, 'inter alia, to maintain its
position of not allowing the entry into our country of south African athletes, in
accordance with General Assembly resolutions 38/14 and 32/105 M•
. ·My Government is also now considering various possible ways and means of
disseminating knowledge about the policies of apartheid at the national level
through the competent ministries, as required by United Nations resolutions.
We are also joining in the demand that an immediate unconditional end be put
to the unjust imprisonment of Nelson Mandela and all others who have been ~eprived
of their freedom because of their opposition to the policies of apartheid.
uruguay is a peace-loving country. We cherish peace, and we believe in peace
as the only way to resolve both internal and international conflicts. We hope that
such a course of action will lead to fundamental change in South African society
before the stubborn blindness of the white minority becomes a kind of suicide and
before the impatience of the black population leads to widespread violence.
Nothing can be built on the moral and material ruins of a society, and a morally
sick society like the racist society of South Africa today cannot continue
forever. The only way out - there must be no delay - is a peaceful understanding
among all races on the basis of full respect for human rights and freedom for all
in a genuine democracy in which the majority, in keeping with political and not
racial criteria, governs as the result of the free expression of the popular will
and the minority's rights and duties are respected because they are full-fledged
members of the community to which they belong.
Mr. van LIEROP (Vanuatu): In another time, at another place, a solitary
figure - a black man, 50 years old - trudged wearily along a dusty dirt road. He
was walking home from a tiring l2-hour day of work. His path led him from the
paved highway near the woodmill where he worked to the lonely deserted dirt road
where he lived with his family. Theyl:ived in a small one~-roomshack without
electricity, running water or·an indoor toilet.
Four adults and five children lived in ~hat home. Despite their obvious
poverty, they were an honest, hardworking church-going family that bothered no
one. They belonged to no organization, except for their church, and had never
participated in any political campaigns or demonstrations.
Suddenly, out of the darkness of the night, he heard the sound of an engine
and saw the approaching headlights of a car. As the vehicle drew nearer, he saw
that it was a pick-up truck. When he saw its occupants his heart beat faster with
fear and trepidation, the constant companions of solitary blacks out at night in
this particular locale. The truck came to a sudden halt near where he was walking,
and four men leaped out and grabbed him roughly, cursing, punching and kicking him
as they did so. He could not see their faces because they wore masks and robes to
conceal their identities. As he was being attacked, he heard what sounded like the
barking of dogs coming from the rear of the truck.
He was thrown to the ground and beaten until he slipped into a state of
near-unconsciousness. The men standing over him smelled of cheap liquor and
laughed as he lay bleeding at their feet. They spat on him, called him names and
ridiculed his blackness.
They then yanked him to his feet by pulling his hair. They tied his arms and
legs with ropes and dragged him to a hole he had never before noticed at the side
of the road. He was shoved into the hole in a standing position and then covered
with dirt until he was buried up to his neck. The men laughed and seemed to be
genuinely enjoying themselves as they contemplated his now helpless state. Being
bound and buried as he was, he could move no part of his body except for his eyes,
his mouth and his head, ever so slightly.
(Mr. van Lierop, Vanuatu)
1'." " .... _ ,
One manthen,wen~ to ~be truck ~nd.came back, being. dragged by two vicious
dogs that were barely restrained by the leash he held with two massive hands.' The
dogs salivated, their eyes fixed on t'he' 'head' in front of them. Their paws clawed
into the ground.as.they tried to pull £re~ of their restraint and get at the
helpless black man.
In a slow, deliberate voice, one of the aSsailants told the black man that
they were going to give him a fair chance to defend himself. The dogs would be
turned loose and, if he should survive their assault for a period of 15 minutes, he
would be dug up, untied and set free. This, he was told, was all the mercy he
could. expect.
(Mr. van Lietop, Vanuatu)
The four robed figures laughed at their joke and then turned the two dogs
loose. The dogs now ceased their frantic pulling and slowly, almost tortuously,
began to circle the black man I s head. SUddenly one dog leaped. The only thing th~
man could think to do was to move his head slightly and try in desperation to ward
the animal off by attempting to bite it before it could bite him.
When they saw this, the four cowards in robes became enraged. One ran over
and, cursing as he ran, delivered a strong, swift kick to the black man's head,
screaming at him, -fight fair, boy, fight fairS, as he did so.
When I hear the conditions some people would impose on the black people of
South Africa in their struggle to survive and to be free, I am reminded of that
time, that place, that incident and the insane admonition to the helpless victim
that he should fight "fair".
Very few items on our agenda have been analysed and discussed as extensively
as apartheid. This particular form of institutionalized racism and what should be
done about it have for too many years preoccupied the international community.
Apartheid has been the subject ,f so much debate that at times it appears that
nothing new can be added to what has already been said so man~ times, with so much
clarity, so much conviction and so much compassion. Yet we must - all of us - try.
The originality of our words is not important. What matters is their
consistency. The repetitiveness of our debate is not offensive. What is offensive
is the repetitiveness of the Pretoria regime's arrogant and shortsighted
intransigence, as well as its continued practice of state terrorism.
Some among us feel that this debate is merely a tiresome ritual. They believe
that the united Nations would be better off without this debate. We, therefore,
implore them to take effective and unequivocal action todaJ against apartheid. We
assure them that should they do so the debate will assume a different tone, if in
fact there will even be a need to continue the debate.
(Mr. van Lierop, Vanuatu)
We do not profess to be so lea~ned or so virtuou" that we know with absolute
certainty how to hasten the demise of apartheid. After all, the perverse sickness
of racism has persisted in many other parts of the world under many guises.
However, even the man whose tortur~ I described at the beginning of this
statement has a different life today. His world may still not be perfect, but at
least his grandchildren have some hope. Their lif~ is better. They can measu[e
appreciable progress in their lifetimes. They have a stake in the land of their
birtGJo Can the same be said of South Africa? Has the Government of South Africa
committed itself to protecting the rights of all its citizens? Has it even
ackn~wledged that all its people are citizens, or are even people?
What distinguishes apartheid is that the minority regime in South Africa has
U~&.~ it illegal for the people of that troubled land to even dream of a different
~~J of life. Some may not feel that South Africa is a totalitarian State, but the
overwhelming weight of the objective evidence says otherwise. How else can one
define totalitarianism, if not by including South Africa today in that definition?
As painful as it might be, we must ask a few questions in order to place this
matter in its proper context. Imagine for a moment that a number of Africans -
black men and women, if you please - have s~ttled in Europe and established their
own segregated governm.-/t. Imagine that they have occupied a corner of its most
beautiful and productive land. Imagine that they have appropriated the resources
of that land, robbed the people of their dignity, violated the women, brutalized
the children and ruthlessly exploited the labour force. How long would this be
tolerated - 500 years, 50 years, five years or five minutes? How many people need
to be murdered under such a system in order to prompt comprehensive international
condemnation and isolation - 700, 70, seven or just one?
With so much violence being visited upon the people of South Aftica, how can
anyone speak of searching for a peaceful solution before violence erupts? How dia'
so many people in So~th Africa lose their lives, if not by violence? BoW was
apartheid ~sed, if not by violence? Bow'does Botha govern and intimidate, if
not by violence? If the world is admonished not to negotiate with terrorists, why
are we told that South Africa's people - the victims of violence - must renounce
violence and negotiate with the nazis who terrorize th~m? How much longer must we
ignore the fact that the South African Government is at war with its neighbours, at
war with the united Nations, at war with its own people, of all races, and at war
with every standard of decency and civilization?
We do not come here today with new ideas, magical words or simplistic
solutions. We are as puzzled and frustrated as anyone else here today. We do not
know what it will take for some of our Members to understand and appreciate the
urgency of the situation and the need for them to join the growing international
consensus. How much more time do they think we have? How much mor~ do they think
the people'of South Africa will tolerate? DO they not realize that even the most
gentle human beings have limits to their patience?
We wish that we could soon hear the last word on this subject. Unfortunately,
we know that mankind will not soon be so blessed. Therefore we must express our
abhorrence of apartheid and our appreciatio~ to those who toil so tirelessly on
behalf of the best instincts of mankind.
We, therefore, commend those who fight to free South Africa and those who
expose that society for what it is. We commend the Special committee against
Apartheid and its Chairman, Mr. Garba, the Permanent Representative of Nigeria.
The Committee's report and its recommendations are a sound framework within which
. (Mr. van Lierop, Vanuatu)
we,can all .continu.e to lend . our suppor·t to the struggle against apartheid. W~ hope
~hAt each nation represented here todaywi11 allow its deeds to match its words on
this subject.
In the future, when apartheid no longer exists and the struggle against racis.
has taken on a new dimension, historians will, in their writings, jUdge our actions
and not our words. We know wbat Prime Mtnister Rajiv Gandhi of India,
Ambassador Garba, Oliver Tambo and so many others like them will be able to tell
their grandchildren at that time. What we wonder is: what will those few who have
chosen to sit on the sidelines as spectators tell their grandchildren and those of
Nelson Mandeta?
Hr. KASEMSRI (Thailand): Once again the General AsseJllbly is considering
agenda item 35, entitled ·Policies of apartheid of the Government of south
Africa· - the policies which have been consistently condemned by the international
community as a crime against humanity and a threat to international peace and
. security.
It is with deep regret, therefore, that we note that the agenda item before
us, which has been with the Organization since its inception, remains a matter of
the gravest concern. Though this year marks the fortieth anniversary of the
founding of our Organization and the twenty-fifth anniversary of the adoption of
the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Counties and Peoples,
the indigenous African people in South Africa today are still under the oppression
of the apartheid system, imposed through the most brutal means available to the
racist regime of Pretoria, in defiance of the purposes and principles of the
Charter of the United Nations, the relevant united Nations resolutions and
decisions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Hence, the General
Assembly together with other organs of the United Nations and the Member States
must redouble the efforts to seek, by all appropriate means, to remedy this
atrocious situation.
My delegation has closely followed the deteriorating situation prevailing in
South Africa and the region. We take note that resistance to the apartheid system
has effectively increased, and has thus met with a new height of repressive actions
on the part of the Pretoria regime. This in turn has led to mounting violence and
bloodshed. we note with profound concern the loss of lives, almost on a daily
basis, among the black people, some of them young children. It is an indisputable
fact that the present unrest in South Africa stems directly from the persistence of
the racist regime of Pretoria in denying the majority of South African people their
inalienable rights, in arrogant defiance of all basic norms of human decency.
During the past few months alone, we have witnessed so many atrocities
committed by the Pretoria regime against the black people. The heinous acts of the
South African authorities at Crossroads ~d other townships early this year along
with the imposition of the state of emergency in 36 districts in July and in
Cape Town last week, as well as the barbaric execution of Mr. Moloise on Friday,
18 October, in defiance of the international appeals for clemency, and the murder
of 750 black people along with the arbitrary arrest and detention of hundreds of
black people have no doubt contributed to more resistance and more international
support for the resistance. Such acts of the racist Pretoria regime further
indicate the inhumanity of its abhorrent policies and practices as well as the
moral bankruptcy of that regime. However, the South African Government continues
to hold on to its immoral apartheid system in defiance of world pUblic opinion by
implementing even more determinedly the policy of bantustanization as well as its
pass laws in order to deprive the black people of their rights. The Pretoria
regime also pursues its imposition of the so-called new constitution, which is
aimed at safeguarding the ill-gained privileges of the white minority and excluding
its opponents from the exercise of any political rights.
Here I. should like to quote the following eloquent words that Bishop
Desmond Tutu spoke at this rostrum a few days ago:
~e run the gauntlet of road-blocks. As I said before, I am the Bishop
of Johannesburg; I am a NObel Laureate; and yet my wife and daughters have
been stripped to be body-searched at a road-block. Your dignity is not just
rubbed in the dust; your dignity is trodden under foot and spat on. Our
people are being killed every day as if they were but flies - just
statistics: one black, two blacks, six blacks have died today. Is that
nothing to you who pass by? What must we say that we have not said? God give
<.
"~ • J "'....._<.....,,,... '. ' us the elO1F1ence to make the world hear that all we want is to be recognized .. for what we are - human beings created in His image.
IIBut is it l.:othing to the world that 800 black pupils are arrested, some
as young as seven years of age who have had to s~nd the night in gaol? Are
you not appalled and outraged? WOuld the West be so passive if the casualties
were white rather than black? Are blacks expendable?1I
(A/SPC/4O/PV.15, pp. 11 and 12)
In view of the foregoing, Thailand, as a non-permanent member of the security
Council, has rendered full support to the relevant resolutions and decisions of the
United Nations, particularly Security Council resolution 556 (1984), which
inter alia
-demands the immediate eradication of apartheid as the necessary step tawards
the full exercise of the right to self-determination in an unfragmented SOUth
Africa",
and also demands the immediate halt to bantustanization as well as the cessation of
the uprooting, relocation and denationalization of the indigeneous African people.
My delegation also rejects as null and void the so-called new consitution imposed
by the Pretoria regime and regards it as an aggravation of the already grave
sit~ation prevailing inside South Africa. Moreover, my delegation, in support of
security Council resolution 569 (1985), demands the lifting of the state of
emergency and the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners
and detainees, including Mr. Nelson Mandela.
My delegation also takes note with grave concern of the renewed escalation of
hostile, unprovoked and persistent acts of aggression committed by the Pretoria
regime against the neighbouring States, in particular the recent invasions of
Angola and Botswana, in violation of their sovereignty and territorial intergrity.
Moreover, the racist regime of South Africa continues to utilize the international
Territory of Namibia as a springboard for sustaining its armed attacks against the
neighbouring countries, in order to weaken the unrelenting support of those
countries for the Namibian people. Such illegal actions, if continued, will
further heighten the threat against international peace and security of the entire
region. Hence, my delegation demands that the Pretoria regime unconditionally
desist from all acts of aggression against the neighbouring States and scrupulously
respect their sovereignty and territorial integrity.
For the foregoing reasons, my delegation continues to cast its vote in support
of the morally correct stand, both in the security Council and in the General
Assembly, on this item. Furthermore, Thailand has steadfastly supported and
strictly adhered to all relevant united Nations resolutions and decisions on South
Africa. Thus, Thailand has no diplomatic relations with South Africa and has
voluntarily imposed a trade embargo against South Africa since July 1978.'
The Government of Thailand, in compliance with the relevant resolutions of the
General Assembly, in particular resolution 39/72 of 13 December 1984, also condemns
apartheid as manifested in sports and will continue to rescind any contact which
would have the effect of perpetuating recial discrimination in SOuth Africa.
My delegation would like to place on record its deep appr.eciation to the
Special Committee against Apartheid, under the leadership of Ambassador
Joseph Garba of Nigeria, and to the Secretary-General of the united Nations for
their untiring efforts in enhancing the international awareness and support in this
regard.
My delegation wishes to pledge once again that Thailand will stand with the
Group of African States on this issue, in order to bring about the complete
dismantling of the repugnant apartheid system in the southern part of Africa.
In conclusion I should like to quote once again.the eloquent words of
Bishop Tutu:
-Apartheid is a threat to world peace. We owe it to future generations.
to end it. Let us be part of the exbilirating enterprise of liberating SOUth
Africa for all its people, black and whi-te together. We shall be £ree -all
of us, black and white together - and we shall remember who helped us to be
free.- (A/SPC/40/PV/1S, p. 16)
Hr. OPWONO (Uganda): Thirty years ago a conference of South Africanf
resolved that their country would never be free until all their peoples lived ...n
brotherhood, enjoying equal rights and opportunities; that only a democratic State,
based on the will of all the people, could secure their birthright to all, without
distinction of colour, race, sex or belief. They pledged themselves to strive
together, sparing neither strength nor courage, until democratic changes had been
won in South Africa.
As the United Nations is marking its fortieth anniversary this year, the
people of South Africa too are observing the thirtieth year of the adoption of a
momentous and historic document - The Freedom Charter - a blueprint for a people's
struggle for freedom, equality, justice, human dignity and self-determination.
It is therefore opportune and fitting that, as we take stock of the successes
and failures of this Organization after four decades of its existence, the plight
of the peoples of South Africa and Namibia, who have been subjected to untold
sUfferings under apartheid and colonialism, should assume prominence.
Forty years ago the founding Members of our Organization reaffirmed faith in
fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the
equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small. In this respect may
I, on behalf of the Ugandan delegation and on my own behalf, pay a glowing tribute
to Ambassador Joseph Garba of Nigeria and his Committee for b)eir selfless efforts
in championing huunfreedoa and dignity. TI1~ir report has once again detailed,
lucidly and collprehensively, the inhuman agonies suffered by the .jority peoples
of South Afri<:a.
We convene here at a tille when world attention is squarely directed at the
explosive events unfolding in South Africa. This heightened concern is not
misplaced. The situation in SOuth Africa has deteriorated dralll8tically in recent
aonths and has reached a critical crossroads in both its domestic and its
international di_nsions.
Throughout the long and bitter struggle against apartheid, the racist regime
in SOUth Africa has always resorted to intensified oppression to stem any increase
in the tide of opposition. It has always met expr:essions of international
revulsion with blatant defiance. That conduct, by itself, is nothing new in the
South Afr ican situation. It is the context in which the racist regime has clung
tenaciously to the 1Ietbod it has practised and pe!:fected over the years that. has
brought South Africa perilously close to the inferno we have predicted for so long.
In July last year, against an overwhelming international injunction and
internal rejection, the racist regime of South Africa proceeded to i1llPlement its
avowed ·con~titutional reform-. It instituted a tricameral parliamentary syst~m
under which the white, Asian and Coloured populations would share in a segregated
and mck power structure. In doing so South Africa sought to consolidate further
the system of apartheid by dividing the ranks of the oppressed and permanently
disenfranchising the black majority. The so-called constitutional reform was
designed to complement the bantustan policy, through which South Africa had
dehumanized most of the black population and divested them of their citizenship.
South Africa's action attracted worlc1-wide condemnation. Internally it has
sparked off uss reaction among the opponents of apartheid of all races. From
Johannesburg to Port Elisabeth the oppressed people of South Africa have mobilized
South Africa's reaction to this new wave of resistance has been most typical.
In a manner reminiscent of Sbarpeville and Soweto, the racist regime has unleashed
upon the people of South Africa its entire brutal police and paramilitary machine.
Prom one black township to another, marauding SOuth African police have shot,
killed and maiJled unarmed demonstrators, most of them young men, women and
children. The toll in that continuing explosion of rage rises day by day. South
Africa's campaign of terror was capped in July this year by the imposition of a
rigorous ·state of emergency·.
Meanwhile the usual pattern of repression and harassment has persisted. Many
Asian leaders were arrested in the aftermath of the resounding boycott of the
so-called elections imposed on their population. The majority of the leaders of
the united De~ -atic Front have been internedJ many of them face charges of
treason.
More than ever before, South Africa has enhanced the operation of its death
squads, whose mIssion it is to assassinate leading opponents of apartheid.
Anti-apartheid trade unionists continue to suffer torture and death in detention.
In South Africa, even the dead are feared by the apartheid Government, although
everybody knows the dead tell no tales. Consequently, black mourners are gunned
down, as though attendance at a funeral had become a crime. Innocent
schoolchildren are oaily herded to police posts to face threats and brutality•
There is fear among the peoples of SOUth Africa, fear allClng the majority and
a8)ng the minority whi~Q population alike, fear of t~e current trend of events and
fear of the future. It is high time that the fascist regime in SOUth Africa saw
the writing on the wall. SODle tille ago the IIajorlty peoples of SOuth Africa turned
the other cheek when they were slapped. Nov they have the courage to throw
stones. What next? This Organization has since 1~46 i~ressed on the South
African regime the need for reform. For the last 40 years the regime has remained
adamant and ignored various united Nations resolutions. TOday, it Is pretending to
be introducing some reforms towards a delDcratic system, by way of the introduction
of bantustans and a tricameral parliamentary system. What a IIOCkery of dellOCracy.
Bow can democratic countries defend this system of democracy in SOUth Africa and
yet not accept it in their own countries?
Those who ever doubted or ignored our repeated warnings that South Africa's
notion of reform was nothing but a deception to hoodwink international opinion now
have the clear evidence and the word of the masters of apartheid for it. on
15 August this year, Mr. Pieter Batha arrogantly reviled the rest of the world and
reaffirmed his regime's determination to adhere to the fundamentals of apartheid
to the very end. All promises that have followed in the name 0 f reform are in the
mould of the old notion.
However, there can be no illusions about the current direction of the struggle
against apartheid. The die has most clearly oeen cast. The oppressed people of
South Africa, particularly the younger generation, have assumed the mantle of
liberation and have raised to new heights the combat against apartheid. Armed with
an indomitable will to freedom, they have defied the mighty military power of the
racist minority regime. Together, they have set out on a determined course to make
apartheid unworkable and the country, under the present system, ungovernable.
Uganda salutes the heroic youth of South Africa. We further reaffirm our
strong solidarity with the national liberation movements of South Africa,
particularly the African National COilgress of South Africa (ANe), who continue to
spearhead the struggle to free their motherland from the clutches of oppression.
At this juncture of the combat against apartheid, the question before the
international community is quite clear - whether to succumb to South Africa's
arrogance and defiance or to act on the side of freedom and justice in order to
hasten the demise of apartheid. Uganda's position on that crucial question remains
unequivocal. We have long advocated the need for the international community to
take decisive and concerted action, including comprehensive mandatory sanctions
against South Africa in accordance with Chapter VII of the united Nations Charter.
In that regard, we note with appreciation the galvanizing international
consensus in favour of isolating the racist minority regime. We particularly
welcome the assurances given by Canada, Australia and New Zealand and the
Commonwealth Accord adopted in Nassau during the recent conference of the
Commonwealth Heads of State and Government. We also welcome the imPOsition of
selective sanctions by the Nordic countries and, more recently, by the majority of
the European Economic Community countries and the United States as a promising,
though limited, trend. However, we do not believe that constructive engagement can
force South Africa to relent and abandon apartheid.
The gravity of the South African situation today demands action beyond
half-measures, tokenism or equivocation. For that reason, Uganda renews its call
to the Security Council to adopt comprehensive and mandatory sanctions against
South Africa. Simi1ary, we continue to condemn those Western countries and their
transnationa1 corporations which, by the collaboration with South Africa in the
economic, military and nuclear fields provide the materials and psychological tools
for the perpetuation of apartheid.
To summari2e, the question of apartheid has three dimensions. Within South
Africa itself it has meant a denial of the inalienable rights of the black majority
and an affront to the principles of equality, dignity and the worth of all human
beings as spelled out in the united Nations Charter. Secondly, the system has in
addition been extended to Namibia by South Africa through its illegal occupation of
that colonial Territory. Thirdly, South Africa has sought to make the whole region
of southern Africa the buffer zone of apartheid. In pursuit of that objective, it
has carried out acts of aggression and a campaign of destahilization against
independent neighbouring countries.
This fortieth session of the General Assembly must therefore speak loudly and
clearly on the fascist policy of apartheid. It must firmly remind South Africa
that the world will not allow another fascist system based on Nazi precepts to
flourish unscathed. It must demand the immediate abolition of apartheid.
Mr. OULD BOYE (Mauritania) (interpretation from Arabic): I should like
to avail myself of this opportunity to renew to you, Sir, the sincere
congratulations presented to you by the Foreign Minister of my country some days
ago upon your election to the presidency of the General Assembly of the united
Nations in this historic year of its life. We are confident that thanks to your
efficiency and your vast experience, our deliberations will be crowned with
success, as has indeed been the case so far.
Ma9Y peopl!!s. J1,a.ve sUffer~ coloniillism. C91onialislU. represents the largest
phenomenon of man's exploitation of his fellow man. However, the most repugnant ~
and retrograde form of relationship between men is the system of apartheid that we
are today witnessing in South Africa. It is • system based on arrogance, hatred
and brutality, aimed at perpetuating the privileges of a minority which claims
superiority for reasons of race and colour.
South Africa's system of racial discrimination resorts to all forms of
pressure, terrorism and torture in order to perpetuate the state of slavery imposed
upon an entire people. They have accustomed us, just as the Tel Aviv regime has
done in another part of our Arab-African world, to constant challenges to the
international community and disregard for its appeals and decisions. However, the
terrorist practices and methods of the Pretoria regime, and its attempts to
institutionalize them, have met with failure and merely led to further violence and
instability. That has been born out by the developments we have been witnessing
throughout the past year.
The Islamic Republic of Mauritania wishes to stress the need for strict
implementation of united Nations resolutions, which define ways and means to
eradicate the apartheid regime in Pretoria and replace it by a democratic system
based on majority rule in a unitary State. We believe that the basic conditions
for this is an immediate halt to policies of repression, torture and execution as
well as the release of all political prisoners, especially the great militant,
Nelson Mandela, and a halt to repeated attacks against neighbouring countries.
Experience has proved that the rulers of Pretoria will not voluntarily respond
to those objective solutions which guarantee the restoration of peace and stability
to the peoples and countries of southern Africa. Therefore 6 in this historic year,
all the bodies and organs of the united Nations, especially the Security Council,
must take strict measures commensurate with developments with a view to punishing
economic ~nd mllitaryfields. . ~- ....
.'.'.
Any humiliation of man.by man, whatever its form, constitutes a crillinal act
tbat has bE!en condemned by ~nkind throughout history. The second Caliph of the
Moslems, OIlar ibn-al-KbattaJ:), in his criticism and punishment of anyone who
disdained and exploited the people, spoke the famous words: -How could you enslave
people when they were born free to their mthers?-. And we say: What right do the
racist rulers of South Africa have in continuing to impose their presence on a
people who wish to enjoy on their own land a life of freedom and dignity?
The overwhelming revolutionary rise of the struggling people of South Africa,
under the leadership of the African National Congress of SOUth Africa (ARC), will
eliminate apartheid, just as t."e racist regime of Southern Rhodesia was brought
down. They will shatter the myth of Botba, just as the myth of Ian SDlith was
shattered. This will inevitably lead to victory for freedom and equality in South
Africa.
Mc. ALZE\MORA (Peru) (interpretation from Spanish): It is hard indeed to
find new words and ways of expressing the feelings and purposes we all share: the
repudiation and eradication of apartheid, the common objective for which we have
been fighting so long.
But in this commemorative year of the United Nationa, when hopes are reborn
and the principles of the Organization are being reaffirmed, it is encouraging to
note that the world remains convinced that, after much hardship and struggle, we
can now begin the final countdown for this scourge of mankind, and that, as the
effects of the first effective sanctions are beginning to be felt, the edifice of
racism and oppression is crumbling. Now more than ever we must redouble our
efforts, strengthen our unity a~d reaffirm our solidarity in the struggle.
In order to contribute to victory for justice and reason in SOUth Africa, to
show in deeds its solidarity and its support and to close ranks with the front-line
countties victims of South African aggression, Peru has recently established formal
diplomatic relations with Angola and officially proposed such relations with
Zimbabwe, Botswana and Mozambique - and the relevant announcements will be made
jointly with these fraternal countries in the coming days.
In an official statment my Government emphatically condemned the execution of
the patriot Benjamin Maloise as a heinous crime and once again appealed to the
International pressure is gradually leading to the dismantlement of apartheid
and the establishment of democracy i~ South Africa. The Nassau Agreements are an
additional important step in this direction.
As iJllllediate goals, we must put an end to the state of emergency, lift the ban
on the activities of the African National Congress of SOUth Africa CANC) and all
the parties and release Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners. We must also
adopt other measures allowing for free expression and self-determinatino for the
black majority and its legitimate representatives in choosing the country's fu~ute.
~ this end we must adopt comprehensive economic sanctions immediately against
South Africa and, in particular, denounce any failure to comply with the arms
embargo decreed by the security Council, no matter from what quarter, as called for
in September by Peru, as a member of the Council, in connection with the latest
South African attack against Angola.
The illegal occupation of Namibia, which makes such transgressions possible,
is an additional factor deserving of condemnation by the international community
and our Organization, which must not allow that in a few months' time there will
have been 20 years of such defiance of its authority and of the international legal
order it represents.
The world h.as .at last i.dentiflec1 with the tragedy of the people of SOUth
Africa and its suffering and,~spiration8. A world-wide movement of political and
soral scope bas begun to .abilize action by Government~ towards a definitive
solution.
The segregationist regime now more than ever before has its back against the
wall, both domesticaU.y and externally. While the courage1ous struggle of the SOUth
African people ls being stepped up in all fields, international action has
considerably strengthened, including action by those countries wi'th major economic,
lIiilitary and political influence, and universal condemnation of apartheid in South
Africa has been expressed in the statements of the overwhelming majority of world
leaders who stood at this rostrum just a few days ago.
As a naelllber of the Special Committee against !2artheid for many years, we have
witnessed the valuable contribution made to this end by its Chairman, General
Joseph Garba of Nigeria, to whom we pay a tribute of admiration and appreciation.
A tribute also goes to the representative of Barbados for his success in preparing
and concluding the draft international convention against apartheid in sports,
whose adoption by the Assembly will strengthen and unite our action in the struggle
against discrimination and injustice.
Peru in voice and in deeds joins in this cause, which is also that of our
people.
Because we are devoted to peace and dialogue, we place dialogue before
confrontation in the solution of problems, and we trust that Pretoria will
understand the desirability of beginning a dialogue immediately. We cannot fail to
recognize the legitimacy of the struggle when it is the only course of action
possible to protect equality, freedom and justice in order that a people can live
in dignity and with pride.
we continue to share the £raternal experiences with the south Afric~ft'people
that have COJle about from our colonial ~st and frOIl out JlUltirac::ial soCiety. That
is the basis of our genuine solidarity with the struggle against !2!rtheid, which
is enshrined in our Constitution that proclai1l8 equality for all before the law,
without any distinction, and reje~tii all Eoru of illperiali., colonialisll and
discrimination and exp:esses soU,darity with all the oppressed peoples of the world.
'l'o~~y we teaffim this solidarit~· and this COIIJIlitaent, and we are happy to
proclatM our faith in final Victory for our cause.
Mr. LEWIS (Canada): When Bishop Tutu finished speaking last Monday, my
Canadian colleagues felt as though there w~re nothing left to be said. I was not
able to be here at the time, but, reading the speech afterwards, I could see him in
my mind's eye, as I have seen him before, standing at this rostrum, urgent,
passionate, lucid, lOOking for all the world like a diminutive version of an Old
Testament prophet, his voice mounting cadence upon cadence, building -
unanswerably - the case against apartheid.
The beauty of Tutu is th.~ simplicity of his eloquence. He reminded us, at the
outset, of his beloved country burning and bleeding unnecessarily to death, and he
reminded us at the conclusion that he would remember whose who helped his people to
be free. In between, throughout the argument, the analysis, the documentation, the
soaring phrases, the pleas for peace, there was one thing, o~a truly phenomenal
thing, utterly absent: there was not so much as a whisper of malice, hatred or
retaliation.
That characteristic of so much of the black South African leadership has
always astounded me. No matter what the provocation, no matter how deep the nadirs
of despair, no matter how ugly the coercive apparatus of racism, the Tutus of the
this world, like the Luthulis 25 years before them, reject vengeance, seek
reconciliation, espouse racial harmony.
If I may be allowed a personal aside, it is the one dimension of the struggle
with which I have some small passing experience. Back in 1959 I lived and worked
with South African refugees on the campus of the University of Legon in Accra.
Ghana was newly independent; Kwame Nkrumah was flying refugees out of South Africa
in the dead of night, attempting to create a lifeline of escape during some of the
darkest hours of the infamous Verwoerd regime. They were all youngish men caught
up in the tragedy of their country, facing the whips of Afrikaner extremism were
they to return, but not one of them - not one of them - embraced at the time
premeditated violence. They all talked, with quiet, single-minded intensity, of
equality, justice, democracy for everyone - white, Coloured, Indian, black.
I heard exactly those reverberations in the words of Bishop Tutu this week.
And just as I asked myself a generation ago, I ask myself now: how do such people
manage to maintain such generosity, such dignity, ~uch vision, in the face of so
prolonged and so malevolent an assault?
I do not know the answer. It may have a lot to do with religious faith; it
obviously has a great deal to do with qualities-of resilience and decency in the
human spirit. But of one thing I am certain: this pattern of almost supernatural
restraint will not last forever. As the fabric of society tears asunder, as the
Government of South Africa defies reason, those who counsel moderation will find
their voices stilled by violence.
That is Why we are in ~Iuch a race with time. And that is why, in Canada's
view, the next six months are crucial. Somehow, we must keep the momentum going.
There is a sense - perfectly real - that we are poised on the brink, that at any
moment South Africa could descend into the maelstrom of conflict and horror. We
have to maintain the faith with the black leadership that never gives up, faith
with those who suffer the police in the townships, with those who languish in
detention, with those who face trial, with those who are hanged at dawn, with those
whose lives are already forfeit in the desperate struggle for freedom. And keeping
the faith means keeping the pressure relentlessly on.
in that respect the world has come a long way in the last several months.
Canada is strongly representative of that crescendo of conscience and action which
now grips nation after nation. I do not think it is necessary to recapitulate for
this aUdience each and every measure Canada has recently introduced. We have
circulated all our relevant political statements as formal documents of the General
Assembly.
•.•. 'f
SUffi~, it to. ~ay that between .;July and SepteJlber oti .this year, :canada , "
announced a whole .r,nge of Qe~~tive sanctions, cutting rigb~.across the' economic:" ,"
sPeCtrwa, ~ncorPorating everyt~ing fra. the ~ffective ban on the sale of
krugerrands to a ban on bankcloans, to an ellbargo on air.-,transport, to a voluntary
ban on the sale of crude oil, to an end of tbe toll-processing ofuraniu. from
Namibia. In concert with so llany other nations, we bave strengthened our sporting
boycott, and 80 anxious are we to give expression to an aroused public opinion that
the canadian Government has opened Cl registry in which every single voluntary
-easure undertaken by Canadian provinces, municipalities, organizations and even
private citizens can be inscribed as a testament of our i~lacable opposition to
apartheid. AS the dossier builds, we will ~orward the contents to the
Secretary-General.
Such iteas, however, are simply the specific ingredients of political policy.
Conceptually, we have gone much further. We have, with determination, helped to
negotiate and then signed OCtober's Commonwealth accord, a document which not only
contains within it selective sanctions collectively applied, but also the terms and
conditions for dismantling apartheid. And then, last week, from this very rostrum,
the Canadian Prime Minister made it clear that, if South Africa resists fundamental
change, we are prepared to illpOse total Ganctions; more, that if apartheid is not
dismantled, we would consider severing relations with south Africa absolutely.
There are aa.ents in the lives of nations when the immorality of one invites
the opprobrlUJ1i of all. This is such a lIOIIent.
Canada recognizes that some countries and some critics argue that the world is
moving too slowly on this issue. In truth, no one would have predicted, a mere six
months ago, that so much would be galvanized so quickly. The pressure on South
Africa is inexorably mounting. South Africa feels the pressure. The strategy now
.ust be never to allow that pressure to abate. Over the next six months - the time
"
frame of the commonwealth accord;;"the' eime"frue whicn'~1:iishop Totu' hai,; enaorsed -
we must use"every:dQ~ice, -every initiati~e, every oppbrtunitYt' every diplomatic
skill, every debate, every appropriate forum within the'UnitedNations and beyond
the United Nations, individually and COllectively, to persuade'South Africa that"
peaceful change alone makes sense and that peaceful change can only be achieved
when apartheid is forever expunged ~rom the vocabulary of human and political
behaviour.
The so-called reforms are no fundamental reforms at all. There remain in
existence more than 300 apartheid laws. They constitute a lexicon of oppression.
They restrict and control, on the basis of race alone, virtually the entire range
of human activity. They are anathema to a civilized society.
Despite the elaborate arguments of some, we are not dealing with a complex
issue. We are dealing with colour and with dignity. Whenever I speak to one of my
diplomatic colleagues from Africa and Asia about apartheid, the elemental pain in
their faces is the pain of a simple truth: colour and dignity. I have never felt
that more strongly in my life than since coming to the United Nations.
(Mr. Lewis, Canada)
ThlS ·is a s~ugql-e weallllust win•. SOU~.A~r~ca must b~ persuaded that the
diseantling of apartheid, tbe ,lifting of the ~~te of ~mergency, the release of
Nelson Mandela and other political detainees, the revocat,ion of the ban On ;;he
African Rational Congress and other political parties, ana above all an iDlDediatf! .
dialogue with the representative black leadership - are the pre-conditions for qn
orderly and peaceful transition to a free and non-racial qemocratic society.
Some PeOple ask, what exactly does the black leadership of South Africa want? :
Let me end on that note with this quote:
-In government we will not be satisfied with anything les~ than direct.
ind~vidual adult suffrage and the right to stand for and be elected to all
organs of government. In economic matters we will be satisfied with nothing
less than equality of opportunity in every sphere and the enjoyment by all of
those heritages which form the resources of the country which up to nOW bave
been appropriated on a racial whites-only basis. In culture we will be
satisfied with nothing less than the opening of all doors of learning to
non-segregatory institutions on the sole criterion of ability. In the social
sphere we will be satisfied with nothing less than the abolition of all racial
bars. we do not demand these things for people of African descent alone. We
demand them for all SOuth Africans, wbite and black. On these principles we
are uncompromising.-
Who is the author of those words? Chief Albert Lutuli, when he was head of
the African National Congress. on what occasion? In 1961, in his speech upon
receiVing the Nobel Peace Prize.
Two Nobel Laureates, Lutuli and Tutu, almost 25 years apart.
The people of Soutb Africa have waited long enough.
:~ .. :<#.
'Mr. 'PANDEt';(Nepal)·:This'yeartoo,· as in the past, my delegation is',
speaking to express our strong condemnation of the policy ofapa~theid'being
pursued by the racist regime·Of South· Africa. 'We do so not only because of our
natural affinity with the majority 'pOpulation of South Africa but-also because we
believe that a policy based on'racialdiscrimination is against human values.
While racism is in itself a crime against humanity through its resort to barbarous
and brutal methods to sustain the abhorrent policy of apartheid, the white minority
r~gime in South Africa has today become a threat to international peace and
security. As my august sovereign, Bis Majesty King Birendra, has said,
"blind to the realities of the day, relying on the bullet as the solution to
every problem, the South African racists have defied all norms of civilized
behaviour".
In spite of global condemnation and appeals by almost all the countries of the
world that pretoria desist from its policy of apartheid, the racist r~gime has
stubbornly continued its acts of terror and repression, in total defiance of the
Charter of the united Nations.*
Only recently the racist r~gime of South Africa declared a state of emergency
with the sole purpose of subjecting the black majority of the country to greater
harassment and repression. AS a result hundreds of black Africans have been killed
and thousands have been imprisoned. with profound grief and indignation, my
delegation came to know that Benjamin Moloise, a poet of repute, had also been
executed, on 18 October 1985. And, sadly, Nelson Mandela, the undisputed leader of
the black Africans, is still languishing in Poolsmar prison.
*Mr. Kiilu (Kenya), Vice-President, took the Chair.
In November 1983, in a bid to hoodwink international public ~pinion, the
racist regtme of Pretoria imposed on the black South African majority its so-called
constitutional reforms. How can such a constitution be progressive when under it
the black majority enjoys none of the fundamental human rights that are basic to
known democratic constitutions.
Equally fraudulent is their scheme of bantustanization, under which indigenous
black Africans are denied basic rights in their own country. Today the blacks, who
number more than 20.6 million out of a total population of 25 million, live in a
mere 13 per cent of the territory, whereas 87 per cent of the territory is reserved
for the 4.3 million whites. It is only within limited areas along the fringes of
the country that the blacks can exercise their rights. Hunger, poverty,
unemployment and malnutrition are rampant in these "homelands". In addition, under
a system of migrant labour, millions of black Africans have been forced to separate
from their families and to work as cheap labourers for whites.
In addition to these acts of repression against non-whites within the country,
the Pretoria regime is posing a direct threat to the stability and security of the
adjoining States. Not surprisingly, in recent years we have seen how the
South African Government is resorting to increased use of military force, not only
to suppress popular resistance in Namibia but also to destabilize neighbouring
non-aligned countries. These acts of aggression constitute a serious threat to
international peace and security. They are also clearly in defiance of the Charter
of the United Nations. In this respect we strongly denounce the military
collaboration between South Africa and certain western countries. We equally
condemn the indirect support and encouragement that the South African racist regime
is receiving from certain countries that profess to be staunch supporters of human
rights and human dignity.
In the last 35 years of apartheid rule we have witnessed enough bloodshed,
imprisonment, murders and tortures. We have also witnessed scores of resolutions
adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations condemning the brutal policy
of apartheid, and also volumes of rhetoric hurled by more than 100 Member States of
the united Nations at the Pretoria regime.
However, the chilling fact remains that apartheid is alive and well in
South Africa. It is clear from this that words have little effect and that
resolutions have a limited effect. In the view of my delegation only economic
sanctions can have a decisive effect. But such sanctions should all be
comprehensive in scope and applied by all the countries of the world, particularly
the affluent and military significant countries which have maintained close
economic and political relations with the racist regime.
Only than will the racist regime fall» only then will there emerge a new
South African State which will be non-racial, democratic and lndependent.
In conclusion, my d~legation would like to express our total solidarity with
the freedom fighters of South Africa and Namibia in their struggle for freedom,
equality and justice. We should also like to express our trbute to the Special
Committee against Apartheid, which has rendered valu8ble service in mobilizing
public opinion against apartheid. As a country with profound faith in human
rights, my country will extend full co-operation and support to the Special
Committee against Apartheid in its struggle against the racist regime of Pretoria.
We fully support the recommendations contained' '~e report of the Special
Committee against Apartheid.
(Mr. Pandey, Nepal)
. - ...' ... " .. Hr. MUDENGE (ZiJllbabwe): Let me l.at the outset convey the appreciation of
Br delegation to the Permanent Representative of Nigeria, Mr. Garba, and through
hi. to the Special Committee against Apartheid for the report before this Assembly
today. As on past occasions, I should like to assure him of my delegation's full
support for the constructive recommendations contained in document A/40/36.
we are here today to discuss the events in the southern tip of our continent,
Africa. It is often said that familiarity breeds contempt. We hope and trust that
the fact that the issue before us today has been with us for so long does not in
any way d~inish its i~portance in the eyes of anyone of us here today. Rather
the continued existence of the issue of apartheid on our agenda, 40 years after the
whole world went to war to rid· our planet of the policies of nazism, should be a
sad reminder to us all of the threat to international peace and security that the
evil policy of apartheid poses to southern Africa and the world at large.
The past year has been an extremely difficult one for southern Africa and in
particular for the oppressed people of South Africa and Namibia. In Namibia we
have witnessed the racist regime of South Africa entrenching the policies of
apartheid through the imposition of a puppet regime in Windhoek and through the
continued militarization of every sphere of life in that Territory. Nearly
20 years after the General Assembly terminated South Africa's Mandate over Namibia,
the realization of fundamental freedoms and independence in that Territory remains
a hope deferred. In South Africa itself we have in the past year witneseed an
escalation of violence as the racist regime intensified its campaign of terror and
repression against innocent civilians in defence of its immoral and abt~rrent
system of apartheid. In the face of the rising tide of the demands for freedom and
justice in South Africa, Pretoria has become more brutal, more defiant and a master
of duplicity and prevarication. Out of all this web of intrique and insincerity
cotes one clear _ssage: the minority regime in Pretoria has no intention
whatsoever of dismantling aJP!rtheid and will stop at nothing short of a total
physical liquidation of all forms of resistance to its tyranny in order to ensure
South Africa's continUed survival as an apartheid State.
Of late that message has emanated from Botha himse~f with uncoumon clarity.
In a series of public statements ranging from the address to the so-called
tricameral Parliament on 2S January to the address to the National Party congress
at Port Elizabeth on 30 September, the Botha r~iae has made it clear that it does
not contemplate the possibility of meaningful political change in South Africa. At
Port Elizabeth, in the now familiar display of his mastery of double talk and
verbal fencing, Botha announced on the one hand that his Government was co_itted
to the principle of a united South Africa, one citizenship and universal franchise,
while on the other hand he reiterated his Government's opposition to majo~ity rule
in a unitary State. S~ilarly, in Durban, and with great fanfare, Botha claimed
that discrimination on the basis of race, ethnic character and origin was now a
thing of the past, yet in the same breath proclaimed his GovernMent's deterMination
to entrench apartheid in the fields of education, residential areas, health and so
forth. In the same vein and without a feeling of having done injustice to hia
sense of logic, Botha talked about his commitment to dialogue and yet has detained
tho~sands of the very people whom he is supposed to talk to. He claims to
encourage dialogue but only recently he withdrew the passports of those among his
followers that seek dialogue with the true leaders of the oppressed majority.
This is a familiar tune coming from Pretoria. We have heard of those
So-called refo£ms before. We are now familiar ~ith the double talk and
double-dealing tactics of the pretoria racists. These manoeuvres cannot blind the
(Mr e Muden,e, Zi1llbabwe)
world to the fact ~hatlnnocent blood ~s be.en shed by the actions of the racist ,
military machinery on ,the st~eets of Johannesburg, Durban, Cape Town and other
cities in South Africa in defence of this evil system of apartheid. We cannot be
made to forget about the recent senseless massacres of civilians, women and
children alike, at Sebokeng, utenhage and Langa. We remember the callous and
purposeless murder on 16 OCtober of the dear son of Africa, the poet and
revolutionarY6 Comrade Moloise. We remember all those who have gone before him in
the cause of freedom and self-determination.
It must be clear to all in this Assembly by now that the white minority in
South Africa never had, does not have and will never have the intention of
voluntarily liquidating its position of domination in South Africa. For anybody to , imagine that a ruthless ruling minority can be charmed to sleep with fast talking
and sweet words as if by some mythical sirens and that it will willingly effect
"reforms" which will ultimately result in its loss of control is either naivety
written large or the depth of duplicity. It is to deny the elementary lessons of
history.
The Afrikaner of today is not the simple, bucolic Boer of yesterday wandering
on the highlands of South Afr ica looking for a patch of L~l'.d to till and graze his
cattle away from the imperialist clutches of a foreign country~ No, the Afrikaner
is highly disciplined, tightly organized, determined and dedicated to maintain the
position of dominance he has won for himself. He has created a powerful modern
industrial state machinery in order to maintain his racial domination of South
Africa. He is sophisticated, he is ruthless, and his history has taught him to
respect power. He has clearly defined objectives and a sense of his own destiny.
He has even made a covenant with a god of his own creation. He is convinced that
it is his manifest destiny to rule Sou{e' '\frica. On the issue of white leadership
of south Africa he will not yield, at any rate not wi-thout a struggle. As the
philosophical father of the modern Afrikaner polities; -the late
Prime Minister, Dr. Hendrick Verwoerd, put it in a speech to the South African
Parliament in 196J:
"Reduced to its simplest form, the problem is nothing else than this: we want
to keep South Africa white. Keeping it white can only mean one thing, namely
white domination, not l.eadership, not guidance but control, white supremaey."
Admittedly Dr. Verwoerd, that immovable granite-like sphinx, was a man of disarming
frankness and had a forthrightness of speech which his successors may find so~what
embarrassing these days. But let there be no mistake that, in spite of what the
famous Afrikaner writer, Andre Brink, so aptly described as Botha's "semantics of
reform", Botha too is a redoubtable bastion of Afrikanerdom moulded in the
Verwoerdian philosophy, as he made clear in his famed "reform" speech in Durban in
August 1985:
"Destroy white South Africa and our influence in this subcontinent of southern
Africa, and this country will drift into factions, strife, chaos and poverty".
(Mr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe)
For that reason, he continued.: .
-I aJIl not prepared to lead. white South Africans and other minority groups on a
road to abdication and suicide 8 •
Be is a man of the iron fist, who believes in verwoerdisM and, more than any other
man, is largely responsible for the growing militarization of the apartheid State
machinery. It is not for nothing that he has created what has now come to be
commonly known as -Bothais Junta-. This is a monstrous machinli!ry of internal
repression and external aggression in order to preserve white domination not only
in South Africa but in the subregion as a whole.
The Afrikaner is ;"", just interested in maintaining domination in SOuth Africa
itself. Bis ambition is to dominate the whole subregion. His policy of
destabilization of hiG neighbours is meant to weaken them so that they cannot
threaten his control of South Africa either by force of example or through economic
competition. His neighbours must be made subservient to and dependent on him, just
as he wants the majority population in SOuth Africa to be. This megalomaniac
ambition for regional domination was enunciated on 2 December 1982 by -Radio SOuth
Africa-, the official mouthpiece of the apartheid State. In a commentary entitled
-Monroe Doctrine Needed for Southern Africa-, the SOuth African Broadcasting
Corporation said, inter alia:
-There are growing parallels between the security role of the United
States in So',Jth and Cent..t"al America and t:.'lat of SOUth Africa in this p&rt of
tbe world. The correspondence arises from similar motives.
-Prom that joint comfidtment is emerging the Monroe Doctrine for the
region. It is taking shape as new de\'elopments lead to a more comprehensive
enunciation of the strategy for regional security... It is based on the
perception that peace and stability in the subcontinent require effective
(Mr. Mudenge, Zilllbabwe)
action against alien military forces, a perception that is shared by the
United States Government ... As the most advanced and powerful State in the
region, South Africa has a special responsibility towards it, as the United
States has long had towards its continent ••• A Monroe Doctrine is needed in
southern Africa. m
The arrogant little men who rule South Africa are not content with their role in
South Africa but seek to dominate and dictate to the southern African region as a
whole.
It is important that we expose fully the ambitions and designs of the
!partheJa State both in SOuth Africa and in the subregion. For a misreading of the
situation can be very costly indeed, as we know from recent history, when a
well-meaning gentleman waved a piece of paper declaring peace in our time. On that
occasion another group of morally squalid little men duped the well-meaning with
sweet reassuring noises. But in the case of South Africa, it seems some people are
in danger of misleading themselves.
It will be recalled that Mr. Botha, after ensuring that the whole world would
listen to his speech in August this year, went ahead to lay it on the line that he
had no inte~tion of carrying out any reforms in SOuth Africa that threatened white
control of that country. Everybody got the message, loud and clear - but
apparently not the over-optimistic United States Assistant Secretary of State for
Africa. To him Batha was speaking in "coded~ political language which we must
patiently decode. The Assistant Secretary of State for Africa should face the fact
that Mr. Batha has no programme to dismantle aparth~ or to share power with the
majority of his countrymen. Not todaYi not in his lifetimei and not in a thousand
years. No amount of decoding or deciphering can re'veal such a non-existent plan.
Equally misguided is a comment by President ReaganJ he was reported on
14 March 1981 to have said; ;nter alia~
(Mr. Mudellge, Zimbabwe)
·Can we abal'lidon a country· - that is, south Aftica - -that has stood beside us
in every war we have foUght, a country that strategically is essential to the
free world? It has production of minerals we ,;\11 must have and so forth.-
", The President should be told that the morally squalid little men ruling South
Africa today were never his friends in any·war.,cThey were supporters of the
equally morally squalid little men in Berlin. They had to be interned for their
pro-Nazi activities during the war. The true friends of America and
President Reagan, some of whom gave their lives during the two wars, are those now
SUffering under the gumboot rule of the allies of the Fascists who now dominate
South Africa.
The relationship of the great Western nations with South Africa is of immense
importance to the whole problem in SOuth Africa. It can either be used as a great
force for good or can become one of the biggest stumbling blocks in fighting
apartheid. It is therefore pertinent that we briefly outline this involvement.
The modernization of South Africa in recent years owes much to western capital and
technology. This structural dependency is exemplified by SOuth Africa's
over-reliance on Weste,n capital and technology for its development. The United
States Federal Reserve Bank reports that as of June 1983 United States banks had
over $3,883 billion worth of loans outstanding to South-African-based entities. In
addition, direct American investment totals some $2.6 billion and American
shareholders own an additional S8 billion worth of stock listed on the Johannesburg
Stock Exchange. Moreover, American capital and technology have been especially
vital in the development of certain key sectors of the apartheid economy. For
instance, American investment in manufacturing industries account for almost
10 per cent of the fixed capital stock in the economy. According to the Investor
Responsibility Research Centre, based in Washington, over 400 United States
companies have affiliates in South Africa and NamibiaJ among them are the biggest
(Hr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe)
united States multinational corporations like General z.btors, Mobil, Caltex and
Ford. OVer 6,000 companies in the United States do business wi.th South Africa
through sales agents and licencing agreements. Nowhere is this dependency more
highlighted than in the computer industry, where SOuth Africa's reliance on foreign
technology is almost total. We are told that the united Kingdom has about
7 billion British pounds invested in South Africa and up to a quarter of a million
British jobs are dependent on trade with South Africa. Cases of south Africa 8s
economic relationship with other western Powers can similarly be advanced.
Because of the West's key contribution to the emergence and sustenance of the
apartheid State, the international co!llTlunity holds it partially responsible for the
evils of apartheid. As a provider of the sinews ~~d muscles for powering the
apartheid engines, the west must be called upon to bear its key responsibility in
the dismantling of this evil machine.
As the representative of the United Kingdom made clear in his anti--econOll1ic
sanctions statement during this debate:
"I make no bones about the fact that sanctions would be extremely damaging for
Western countries, includi,ng the United Kingdom. It is bot a fact we have
ever sought to conceal. We do not see the sense of punishing the ordinary
people of Britain because the South African Government is pursuing bad
policies". (A/40/PV.52, p. 22)
We ask our British friends to consider carefully the price they are asking
23 million black people in South Africa to pay to keep 250,000 Englishmen employed
and to enable British companies to reap their pro£!ts from South Africa. We invite
them to read today's death toll from South Africa, as well as yesterday's and the
one of the day before that, and so on and so forth - the hundreds dead, thousands
incarcerated and millions eking out a fragile existence in dust bowls called
homelands.
(Hr. Mudenge if Zimbabwe)
We ask them to look back at 1910 when the union of SOUth Africa was formed. Then
Britain decided to win over the Boers by giving them a magnanillOus constitution.
Yet somebody has had to pay dearly for that act of British magnanimity to the
Boers. Yes, the IIprice of magnanimity· after the Boer war has had to be borne by
the black SOUth African. Has this not been too high a price to pay for Britl1sh
magnanimity? Can we really continue asking the black South African to pay the
price for British profits and employment? Is this fair?
No amount of hair-splitting casuistry will do. The issues are
straightforward. It is now time for each one of us to take a stand. Verbal
camouflage is no substitute for action.
The African nations have decided that enough is enough. Apartheid must be
smashed. The massacres must be stopped. The united Nations, as the guardian of
international peace and security, is therefore called upon today to reaffirm that
apartheid is a crime against.humanity, and to request the security Council to
impose and implement forthwith comprehensive mandatory sanctions on the apartheid
regime under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. And if the
apartheid regime persists, the United Nations will be asked to take any and all
such action as shall be deemed necessary to achieve this.
There remains no nnre honourable course of action than the one we have just
proposed. Yes, we know that some of our friends in the West may stand to lose,
te!!!pO!:i!!:i1Yi ! dare aaYi some of the profits that they are reaping from the blood
of their brothers in South Africa. But the very same fears were expressed by the
very same interest groups at the time of the abolition of slavery. Yet after the
abolition of slavery commerce and trade did not collapse. The great nations of the
west continued to prosper. History has lessons here for us. Let not greed and
shortsightedness harden our hearts and numb our consciences.
(Hr. Mudenge, ZiJllbabwe)
The argument of the slave masters that abolition would hurt the slaves more
than the owners is as hollow now as it was then. Today we are told that
cc.prehensive mandatory sanctions against south Africa will hurt the black people
of SOuth Africa. There is nothing more insulting to our intelligence than this
disingenuous and hypocritical drivel. It is a sanctimonious subterfuge proffered
in order to evade acting firmly and resolutely. It is no more than the proverbial
fig leaf o( shame meant to hide the greed for super-profits which the
multinationals reap in South Africa. The African people in South Africa know full
well that if the physician has to operate in order to Z'emove a tumour the patient
will have to endure some degree of pain from the operation. As the late Chief
Albert Luthuli, another black NObel Prize winner from South Africa, and a great
leader of his people, stated more than 25 years ago;
RThe economic boycott of South Africa will entail undoubted suffering for
Africans. We do not doubt that. But if it is a method that shortens the day
of bloodshed, the suffering to us will be a price we are willing to pay.R
In mentioning the SUffering of the black people under mandatory sanctions I do not
speak from abstraction or theory. I speak as a representative of a country where
not so long ago the black popUlation suffered for 15 years from the effects of
comprehensive mandatory sanctions imposed by the United Nations at the instigation
of the Government of the United Kingdom. The sanctions did not, by themselves,
topple the Smith regime; but they were psychologically devastating to the morale of
the white minority. To the vast majority of the black people in Zimbabwe
comprehensive mandatory sanctions were the clearest manifestation of the
international community's solidarity with the righteousness of their cause. It was
a source of inspiration. There is no doubt that, despite the vaunted ingenuity of
the Smith minority regime to evade sanctions - which incidentally was only
(Hr. RJdenge, Zimbabwe)
possible because ~d'El.ia to ~l~ intel)tl?, and pUJ::PQSes ha.!i e,conol'Dical1y become the
fifth province of SOuth A~riC4 ,against whom. there were no.sancti~ns-.yet in spite
of that, the weariness with United Nations sanctions and the escalation of the .: '/
liberation war in the end forced the illegal Smith regime to the negotiating
table. I have no doubt in my mind that comprehensive mandatory sanctions,
diplomatic and other pressures as well as the armed sttuggle can ultimately bring
about similar results in SOUth Africa.
SOuth Africa and its friends have also argued that mandatory sanctions woulq.
hurt the neighbouring black majority-ruled countries in the region. we do not deny
this likelihood. However, we will not accept that the world colIII'Qunity should use
us as an excuse for not facing up to its responsibility to the people of South
Africa and Namibia. The suffering of the people of Zambia, Mozambique, Botswana
and Malawi did not prevent the United Nations from assuming its duty by imposing
co~rehensive mandatory sanctions against Rhodesia. Is it not strange that
countries which only yesterday imposed sanctions against Nicaragua, poland,
Afghanistan, Argentina, and so on, should be those fighting desperately against the
imposition of sanctions against South Africa on the grounds that sanctions do not
work? Why this double standard? Are sanctions a valid weapon or not?
The urgent need to act decisively against the apartheid monster has never been
more pressing. We stand on the precipice of disaster. There are many angry voices
asking why eivilized man is prepared ~ tolerate this form of slavery practised by
a group of fascists. Why is it that when that same evil doctrine was practised in
Europe mankind was roused to die fighting it? Yet when the apostles of that same
doctrine practise their evil belief in SOuth Africa today we are called upon to be
WconstructiveW and actively to -engageWthe practitioners of that evil in dialogue,
to coax them out of their belief, with reason and sweet words.
(Mr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe)
'Can we blame 'those angrY young" lien in beto, SOUth Afri~a/who have "begun
asking the question, wby'this dOublestan&lrd in the""World's reaction? Is it
partly because the victims on this occasion are OthelIo's countrymen? .It is our
fervent hope and ardent wish that the colour of the victim in this case has not
influenced the thinking and actions of some of the great nations of our age. For
this would be such a tragedy and failure that future generations will muse in
amazement how it was that man, capable of venturing into space and of so many other
scientific wonderments, could still be swayed by such primeval instincts as race
and colour. I honestly hope that this blight does not afflict the thinking of the
great nations of this generation.
My delegation is encouraged by the increasing and irreversible momentum
towards the imposition of mandatory sanctions on Pretoria, as evidenced by the
adoption of Security Council resolution 566 (1985), advocating voluntary sanctions
against the South African regime. A significant number of countries have taken
steps towards applying voluntary sanctions. These are on the whole encouraging
developments. But as the report before us rightly states:
•••• voluntary, unilateral and limited sanctions of individual western
Governments are inadequate to deal with the critical situation.·
(A/40/22, para. 354)
We therefore call on the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan and west
Germany who are by far the most important investors in SOuth Africa to join the
growing international resolve to oblige SOuth Africa to stop playing truant on the
question of apartheid and Namibia.
While comprehensive and mandatory sanctions remain indispensable weapons in
the struggle against apartheid, it goes without saying that, in the ultimate
analysis, it is for the people of South Africa themselves, through their
(Hr. Mudenge, Zimbabwe)
legltt._s:. repr...n~t;.iv••, :the -African. "tiona·l-ecngr~~s.of- S9'1~~, Afd~ (ANe) and
~. :Pan, Afrlcanist. .~F••s. of·~ania (PAc)·tQ. intensify. tJleliberation strugg1e. ,.. ,
against tile racist regi!le.Hawever, su~ • int.ensifiQtion of .the liberation..-.~ '•.
struggle. ~s only possible if we, the _~rs of tile international co-alnity, are,. .'~.
willing to translate our words of support into aeaningful action. Th~ • • .'1.;
international ~nity _st dellOn.teate its resolve by incr~asing support to ~.e,.
people of SOUth Afdc:a to enable thea to intensify their struggle.
(Mr. Mudenge, Zblbabwe)
..- .,
. c.",..: t.: .".-t ~.;~. ~:..' ~ ... :" ." • , .•. t. •. - ._ ._ •
, .. In this re9~ra ay. delegatlc:sri ~full.y -Bupportsthe ca:ll by'the' SpeCial. COIIIIittee,
agai'nst Apartheid for increased ass"i'stClnce'to the opPressed people-'of ,SOutti Aftlca"
as contained'in paragraphs 38a;.39l of'·its, re~rt (A/4iJ/22). -'This has' beCOlle~en,
IIOre 'urgent becaUse 'of the·'increaseCi 'acts of' brutality andopptession by the
Pretoria regillli!~ we believe 'tbatSOUth AfriCa can take the thiited Nations
seriously only when the States Members' of this international ·body take their·
obligations and commitments in the same light.
It Is not my wish to end my statement sounaing as a Cassandra of doo.. But
the vision of the Tiber foaming with blood brings me less shivers than the
Armageddeon that faces us in the racial conflagration threatening the African
sub-continent. No multi-racial societies will be saved from the consequences of
the dark forces and emotions that will be unleashed by such a horror. I therefore
implore the memers of the Assembly not to fiddle while Rome is burning, lest, like
Hero of old, we ourselves are consumed by the resultant raging forces.
Mr. ALPDUI (Morocco) (interpretation from French): More than 30 years
ago the United Nations first considered the policy of apartheid of the South
African Government and its consequences for international peace and security. A
number of resolutions were adopted reflecting the unanimous repudiation by the
international community of the foundations and manifestations of this inhuman and
degrading policy, and called for its abolition.
The security Council and the General Assembly in particular condemned
apartheid as a crime against the peace and security of mankind, recognizing thereby
that the oppressed peoples were entitled to freedom and dignity. Then political,
diplomatic, economic and military measures were recoumended in an effort to prevail
upon South Afdca to repudiate the system of apartheid and lay the foundations for
a democratic and non-racist society, in which all members would enjoy the sage
rights without distinction as to colour, race or creed.
(Hr. Rldenge, ZiJlbabve)
But far from responding to the legitimate aspirations of the South Afrioan
people, and the appeals of the international oommunity, south Africa oontinues its
policy of exiling, imprisoning, torturing and summarily executing all those who
Oppose the daily manifestations of apartheid. Similarly, in its quest for status
as a regional Power, which would make it possible for it to extend its hegemony
over tbe Whole of southern Africa, the South Afrioan regime continues illegally to
occupy the Territory of Namibia and to oommit, with impunity, acts of aggression,
destabi1ization and economic blackmail against neighbouring countries.
Faced with the growing anti-apartheid oampaign being oarried out by various
organizations, trade unions and religious groups, South Africa is attempting to
stave off the end of its regime by introducing facsimiles of reform. But the
majority of the South African population has not been taken in by this, because it
has rejected such proposals whioh are in actual fact mer~ manoeuvres aimed at
undermining the solidarity of its members~ deflecting the attent~on of world public
opinion, and weakening the efforts of the international community to hasten the end
of the apartheid system.
Furthermore, recent events in southern Africa have only confirmed the South
African r~gime in its intransigence and determination, at all costs, to keep the
indigenous population in a state of slavery. However, the international community
oannot compromise with aparth( .J, which is the very denial of the fundamental
rights recognized in th~ Charter and the human values we all share. It must step
up ita activities to eliminate, rapidly, totally and once and for all, the system
of apartheid and to bring about the free and democratic expression of the wishes of
the whole South African population.
(Mr. A1aoui, Morocoo)
'!'his aeans that all states must apply ~ _eaures adopted by the united
11,tiona, partieula~ly with regard to the oil elllbargo, the ending of all ailitary
co-operation, and part~,cularly nuclear co-operation with South AfricaJ the ending
of all investaents and the cutting off of ail aaterial and moral support for that
r6gime, supporting instead the just struggle being waged ~ the oppressed masses
for the recovery of their legitiJlate rights.
For its part, the Kingdom of Morocco, which has constantly and unreservedly
supported the struggle of the south African people, believes that it is now tille
for statement~ and verbal condemnation to be translated into concrete, urgent and
firm action to eliminate the anachronistic system of apartheid and to put an end to
one of the most grave sources of instability in Africa. We express the hope that
1986, which has been proclaimed the International Year of Peace, will see a
concerted a~d deliberate effort on the part of the international community to
eaancipnte the Namibian people and to ensure that the peoples of South Africa enjoy
their fundmma"tal rights and freedoms.
I cannot end thi~ statement without expressing our gratitude for the militant
and devoted rol~ played by the Special Committee against Apartheid and its
Chairman, Ambassador Joaeph Garba, in mobilizing'world publi,c opinion against the
outrageous policy of apartheid.
The meeting rose at 1.20 Pim•