A/42/PV.69 General Assembly

I should first like to draw the attention of the General Assembly to the report of the Special Political Committee (A/42/765). May I take it that the General Assembly takes note of that report? It was so. decided.

I should like to propose that the list of speakers on the item before the Assembly this morning be closed tomorrow, 17 November 1987, at noon. If I hear no objection I shall take it that the Assembly so decides. It was so decided.

I call first upon the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid, Mr. Joseph Garba of Niger ia. Mr. GARBA (Nigeria) (Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid): In my capacity as Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid I have the honour of opening the debate on agenda item 33, entitled "Policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa". First of all, however, on behalf of the Special Committee, I should like to take this opportunity to congratulate you, Sir, on your well-deserved election to the presidency of the forty-second session of the ~eneral Assemhly. ~he Special Committee's annual report deals comprehensively with the situation in South Africa, the international response and the activities of our Committee. I want to point out that this year we have endeavoured to improve the format of our report to make it more succinct, more analytical and even shorter. We have also refrained from. specifically mentioning the names of some Member States which are, nevertheless, supporters of and collaborators with the apartheid regime. We sincerely hope that this gesture will in turn warrant their studied consideration of the Committee's report and draft resolutions without using name-calling as an excuse to denigrate the work and draft resolutions of the Committee and conseauently to vote against the latter. With that in mind I shall limit myself to a general evaluation of the situation in that country and to the main obj~tives of the Special Committee, with a view to ending apartheid. Since last year when I opened the debate on this item the situation in South Africa, as is well known, has worsened. The apartheid regime's repressive apparatus has worked relentlessly to suppress the people's most natural resistance to the system of apartheid and their demand for eauality and basic human rights. At the same time, Pretoria has continued its terrorist activities across its Own horders. In an effort to weaken the economies of the front-line States and undermine their economic and political independence, Pretoria has continued to commi t wanton acts of aggression anCl, in its usual cynical way, has resorted to abductions, assassinations and commando attacks on the soil of those countries. Inside South ~frica itself, arrests, detentions - including those of women and children - trials, torture, executions, abductions, assassinations and the use of right-wing vigilante groups to instigate violence by hlacks againsts blacks have become the order of the day. The press has been muzzled. Most recently, pressure has been put on university campuses to suppress opposition to apartheid, on the threat that state financial support will he cut in the event of non-compliance. All these instruments of State-sponsored terror are being routinely used by the racist minority regime to crush the liheration struggle in order to maintain apartheid, while at the same time the so-called reforms have failed to co-opt the overwhelming majority of the population. The main pillars of that evil system ar.e still intact. The Group Areas Act and the Race Classification Act are still in force. The policies of homelands and forced population removals continue unabated. And the black majority is still deprived of participation in the national central decision-mak ing process. (Mr. Garba, Chairman, Special Committee against Apartheid) Despite all the terror of a police state under the continuing state of emergency, however, the determination of the struggling people of South Africa is stronger than ever. The long and very effective black miners' strike in August this year was another event that demonstrated the capacity of black workers to take peaceful and organized action to promote their demands and indicate the strengthening of the centres of opposition to the Pretoria regime. The liberation struggle in South Africa has also given some white South Africans food for thought. Having concluded that the apartheid regime has no intention of ending apartheid, and justifiably fearful of the consequences of that intransigent position for a rapidly developing situation, some progressive whites left the ruling National Party to run independently in the May whites-only elections. Others, including Afrikaner academics, parliamentarians and businessmen, have most recently had talks in Dakar with the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC) to explore the possibility of preparing the ground for negotiations on the future of the country. It is against that background that the recent release of Mr. Govan Mbeki and four other political prisoners in South Africa should be evaluated. Although we welcome their release, that action can only become meaningful as a first step towards the elimination of apartheid if it is followed by the unconditional release of Nelson Mandela and all other political prisoners and detainees, the unbanning of national liberation movements and other organizations and, most important, the lifting of the state of emergency and the return of all political exiles. Such meaningful actions are needed to ease racial tension and open the way for genuine negotiations that will create a democratic and non-racial South Africa. At the same time, the struggle in South Africa has been gaining more and more international recognition, solidarity and assistance. International pressure on Pretoria has been maintained and in certain cases has indeed been intensified. Governments as well as intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations have increasingly adopted measures against the apartheid regime and have extended aid to front-line and other independent African States to enable them to withstand Pretoriats acts of aggression and destabilization. The international demand for comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa has also become more forceful. The United Nations and the international community have intensified their efforts in the struggle against the evil system of apartheid and against the racist regimets illegal occupation of Namibia and its acts of aggression and destabilization. Regrettably, however, a few Western countries, because of selfish economic and other misplaced interests, still maintain considerable relations with South Africa and have become an obstacle on the road of effective pressure on Pretoria by refusing to accept the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions by the Security Council and other international bodies. Toe United Kingdom, for example, opposed further sanctions against South Africa at the recently concluded Commonwealth Conference in Canada. How ironic it is that a country that played a significant role in the development of the concept of hUlnan rights and modern parliamentary democracy is now, on various pretexts, obstructing the adoption of measures that would lead to the restoration of basic human rights in South Africa and would peacefully contribute to the making of a democratic non-racial society. Also of serious concern to us are the expanding economic ties between Japan and the apartheid regime. Japan has, unfortunately, now become the first trading partner of South Africa. Japan, some other countries of the Far East, the Federal Republic of Germany and the united Kingdom are becoming the beneficiaries of some diversions of South African trade now occurring following the selective measures adopted by the United States Congress last year. The United States measures constitute a step in the right direction, and, I believe, should be strengthened. We have also taken note of some restrictive measures taken by Israel last September, even though little is known about the fate of old contracts between Israel and South Africa in the military and other strategic fields and even less about the implementation of these rather limited measures. Nevertheless, we recognize them for what they are, and we hope they will be strengthened as time goes by. In this context, I wish to note that the position of certain Western Members of the United Nations which have thus far obstructed this Organization from taking full and effective action against the apartheid regime gives rise to some serious questions. Is it mere coincidence that those States have the greatest economic interests in South Africa? How is it that those same Member States declare sanctions ineffective against South Africa while at the same time demanding and indeed imposing sanctions against other countries? Why is armed resistance anathema in South Africa while it was a glorious means in the past history of achieving independence and freedom? There is no need to answer those questions; the answers should be obvious. When it wants to create a pretext, the human mind is quite adept at doing so. But there should be a limit to hypocrisy. In this Organization we should be bound by rules based on at least a modicum of moral values as a common denominator, especially in this case, where the basic human rights of millions of black people The Special Committee's persistent recommendation for comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa is geared to a peaceful settlement of the problem and reflects the wishes of the oppressed people, wishes expressed by most of the genuine leaders of the black population of South Africa, of the national liberation movements and of black trade-union federations, by church leaders such as Archbishop Desmond Tutu, by leaders of the front-line and other African states and of the Organization of African Unity (OAUj. It also reflects the conviction of the international community, as expressed by decisions of the General Assembly, by a number of international conferences against apartheid, including the World Conferences held at Paris in 1981 and 1986, and by such distinguished groups as the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group. The international community is convinced that unless sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter are adopted the South African regime will not move towards a process of eliminating apartheid and that such sanctions constitute the most effective and peaceful way of eliminating that system, by forcing the regime into serious negotiations. The measures are aimed at the apartheid system and not at any sector of the population. In the absence of such sanctions, the obvious prediction for South Africa is more violence and bloodshed. None the less, until further sanctions under Chapter VII are imposed, the Special Committee would urge States at least to adopt and strengthen their own restrictive measures against South Africa and to observe existing international measures, including the oil and arms embargoes. The present international measures, including those of the European Economic Community and the Commonwealth, should be strengthened. In that connection, I should like to express the Special Committee's gratitude to all those Governments, particularly the Nordic Governments, and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations which have recently taken effective measures against the apartheid regime. What is urgently needed now is for the loopholes to close, both in the measures among countries and witnin countries' own sanctions. What is also urgently needed is for those national and collective measures to be effectively monitored. We cannot overemphasize the importance of those requirements. The closing of loopholes and tne effective monitorin9 of measures and the punishment of violators is the minimum we can expect at this moment. Otherwise we should consciously be allowing Pretoria to circumvent even these limited measures and scoff at our piecemeal and half-hearted steps. In that regard, arguments, especially by the United States Administration, that the sanctions imposed by the United States Congress last year have not been effective are only superficial and cannot be accepted as a valid yardstick by which further international action should be determined. Those sanctions are selective and therefore cannot - I repeat, cannot - be fUlly effective. Moreover, the effectiveness of sanctions cannot be judged in the span of one single year. They can only be expected to yield longer-term effects. While appreciating these sanctions adopted by the United States Congress and its present efforts to strengthen them, we nevertheless regret the Administration's resistance to further sanctions and take strong exception to its new policy of "active and creative diplomacy", which is in effect the resurrection of the failed policy of so-called "constructive engagement". On a related matter, the British and the United States proposal to extend aid to blacks in South Africa and to the neighbouring States can only be a parallel effort but not an effective substitute for sanctions. While such aid is meant to ameliorate the suffering of the oppressed peoples in the region, it does not in any way contribute to dismantling apartheid. Our goal, and indeed the goal of the international community, is not to reform apartheid, but to eliminate it entirely. No amount of diplomatic argot or legerdemain can alter the need for this urgent action or exempt us from our responsibilities. It is our bounden duty to help the people of South Africa eradicate the system of apartheid, which violates the Charter of our Organization as well as all international human rights instruments, and which constitutes a threat to international peace and security. It is, therefore, the hope of the Special Committee that the General Assembly will give its serious consideration to the recommendations contained in the Committee's report. Those recommendations are realistic, clear and succinct. They are underscored by our collective imperative for real action. 'rh~s is a political and moral imperative. History will be merciless on all of us if we do not stand up with seriousness and determination to combat apartheid, this grave affront to our humanity.

I call on Mr. Arif Shahid Khan, Rapporteur of the Special Committee against Apartheid, to me at the outset to congratulate you, Sir, on your election as President of the G~neral Assembly at its forty-second session and to express my deep appreciation for your personal dedication and commitment to the struggle against apartheid, now, a~ well as during your tenure as Permanent Representative of the German Democratic Republic to the United Nations and member of the Special Committee against Apar theid. Secondly, I wish to thank you for calling upon me to present, on behalf of the Special Committee against Apartheid, its annual report (A/42/22), as well as the special report on recent developments concerning relations between Israel and South Africa (A/42/22/Add.l), which was prepared in accordance with paragraph 7 of General Assembly resolution 41/35 C. Both reports are shorter, concise, and focused on key issues, in keeping with the wishes of Member States. With regard to the annual report, the Special Committee has expressed its grave concern on the rapidly deteriorating situation in South Africa arising from the policies and practices of apartheid characterized by a mounting reign of domestic repression, violence and terror. Moreover, the Committee has drawn attention to the apartheid regime's atrocities in the illegally occupied Territory of Namibia and to the continuing acts of aggression and destabilization against countries of the region, which constitute a threat to international peace and security. The Special Committee against Apartheid wishes to emphasize that the heroic struggle now being waged by the oppressed people of South Africa poses a grave challenge and provides a great opportunity for the United Nations and its Memoer States to take decisive action to accelerate and secure the eradication of the inhuman system of apartheid and to enable the people to establish a free, unfragmented, non-racial and democratic society in South Africa. The past year has witnessed an unprecedented nation-wide resistance to apartheid which the racist regime attempted to quell through co-ordinated assauit on all forms of opposition in the country. The state of emergency, in force since. July 1985 and successively renewed in December 1986 and June 1987, reveals South Africa as a police State where the security forces have almost unlimited powers of repression and in which their brutal actions are virtually immune from prosecution. The extensive use of detention without charge or trial, the disappearance of anti-~artheid activists, even of children, is nowadays a weapon of intimidation and a deliberate mechanism to weaken the opposition. Draconian measures imposed on foreign and domestic media, which prohibit the publication of acts of suppression of those resisting apartheid, are only aimed at concealing the regime's atrocities. Against this background, the Special Committee intensified its efforts to highlight particularly the plight of political prisoners, trade unionists, students and youth, women and children, and religious institutions, journalists and others. It continued to promote the dissemination of information and to mobilize greater international action against apartheid. Through meetings, seminars, conferences and other forms of co-ordination and co-operation with governments, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, the Special Committee promoted general awareness that one of the most effective measures for peaceful change in South Africa is the imposition of comprehensive and mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. Regrettably, two permanent members of the Security Council repeatedly made it impossible for the Council to agree on such measures called for by so many General Assembly resolutions. However, the Special Committee noted with appreciation that a number of Governments have taken specific action against the apartheld regime. Over the years, many countries, such as members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and the Organization of African Unity (OAU), as well as socialist countries, have adopted effective measures. Among Western countries, the Nordic States have been in the vanguard of the campaign for sanctions, gradually imposing effective trade and other measures. Others adopted selective sanctions. All those activities were a step in the right direction. While the Special Committee considered most of the measures positive, serious efforts are needed to be made towards a more concerted approach and more effective monitoring. Of growing concern to the Special Committee are the repeated violations of the mandatory arms embargo, the oil embargo and other international sanctions, as well as the reluctance shown by some Governments to enforce fully the implementation of thei r own measures. In the present annual report, the Special Committee has also discussed the international response during the period under review and the thrust of its own initiatives and activities. In view of this, the Special Co~nittee considers that international action must be taken with a sense of urgency and a firmness to force the apartheid regime to comply with resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. The Special Committee has therefore submitted a number of recommendations so that the United Nations and the international community may, through concerted and decisive action, fulfil their commitment to secure the liberation of South Africa. The Special Committee considers it essential that the international community take further steps towards the total isolation of South Africa. The arms embargo, the oil embargo, the prohibition on imports of coal and agricultural products from South Africa, a ban on technology and loans, the termination of air and sea links and an expanded sports and cultural boycott, constitute an integral part of the United Nations strategy to combat apartheid until comprehensive and mandatory sanctions are imposed by the Secur i ty Council. The Special Committee is sure that such measures, backed by the determination to monitor their implementation and the punishment of its violators, will force the racist regime to accept the inevitable, which is the elimination of apartheid. Concerted and intensified pressure by the international community constitutes a peaceful instrument to bring the apartheid regime to its senses and to make it realize that an immediate and unconditional amnesty for all political prisoners and detainees is a necessary ingredient for any meaningfUl negotiations with the genuine leaders of the people. Equally important, the international community must provide assistance to alleviate the suffering of detainees, women and children and other victims of ~artheid, and to expose the crimes that the racist regime has committed and which it attempts to disguise and hide through severe restrictions on the freedom of the media and by making rhetorical statements about so-called reforms. In the light of the developments, I wish to draw attention to a set of particular recommendations contained in paragraph 150 of the Special Committee's annual report and to appeal to the international community for its effective support. Regarding the Special Committee's special report on recent developments concerning relations between Israel and South Africa, I wish to emphasize that its members attentively examined the developments in the military and nuclear fields as well as other economic collaboration between South Africa and Israel during the period under review, and the measures that the Government of Israel has announced with regard to sanctions against South Africa. The Special Committee duly took note of the decision of the Israeli Cabinet to impose a package of sanctions against South Africa that would affect trade, investment, loans, sports, cultural and scientific exchanges, tourism and official visits. However, the Special Committee notes that no mention was made about existing contracts in the military, nuclear and scientific fields. It is the Special Commlttee's view that these limited steps will acquire significance only if they are followed up by concrete action, expansion of the measures to the level announced by other countries and a complete and transparent cessation of arrangements between South Africa and Israel in the recent past. Therefore, the Special Committee recommends to the General Assembly that it authorize the continued monitoring of the implementation of United Nations resolutions on South Africa, in particular those concerning violations of sanctions, and urge all States concerned to extend their co-operation to the Special Committee in its efforts. These are some of the main recommendations of the Special Committee to whim I wished to draw the Assembly's attention. I request it to consider and adopt the present annual report and the special report of the tipecial Committee against Apartheid. The Special Committee trusts that all Members will consider its recommendations positively in order to enable the General Assembly and the Security Council to take appropriate action to secure the speedy eradication of apartheid.

I call on the Chairman af the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa to introduce the Group's report. Mr. VRAALSEN (Norway), Chairman of the Intergovernmental Group to Mon:tor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa: The GenEral Assembly, on 10 November 1986, at its forty-first session, adopted resolution 41/35 F establishing the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa. Your predecessor, Sir, after consulting the regional groups and the Chairman of the Special Colnmittee against Apartheid, Ambassador Garba, early this year appointed 11 Member States to the Intergovernmental Group. The subsequent work of the Group and the report, which I have the honour oE int:roaucing 'ne1:e today IY..;t. ~hi~h 'tii.ll. 1J.IZl.f.octunate.Ly not be available to delegations until tomorrow, represents the first concerted effort by the international community to provide a basis for an effective oil embargo against South Africa, and as such it will hopefully make an important contribution towards the elimination of apartheid. Last year's decision by the General Assembly to set up the Group sprang from a widespread conviction of the importance of comprehensive sanctions against South Africa in order to compel the South African Government to go to the negotiating table. It was felt that this field represented particular potential in that respect inasmuch as oil is virtually the sole strategic raw material in which South Africa is not self-sufficient. So far, many Governments have imposed unilateral oil embargoes or adopted similar measures. South Africa, however, continues to obtain oil because the eXisting measures are not mandatory and they are not universal. Since its inception seven months ago, the Intergovernmental Group has taken steps to fulfil its mandate, and it has prepared a report, which it has approved by consensus. That report was requested in paragraph 7 of resolution 41/35 F. It will be issued as document A/42/45. As a first step, the Intergovernmental Group invited the representatives of the liberation movements of southern Africa to attend its meetings as observers. The Group also sent letters to the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and to the Organization of African Trade Union Unity expressing our wish to co-operate closely with them. Furthermore, the Group sent a questionnaire accompanied by a letter to all Member States requesting information on legislative, technical, administrative and other measures taken to prevent the supply and shipping of oil and petroleum products to South Africa and Namibia. Responses to this questionnaire are reproduced in Annex 11 to our report. Some individual cases of violations of the oil embargo were brought to our attention. After receiving information on an alleged violation, I, as Chairman of the Committee, in each case addressed a letter to the Permanent Mission and/or Permanent Observer Missions concerned. The responses to these letters are reproduced in annex III to our report. Let me hasten to add that although we have presented these alleged cases in our report, such presentation does not necessarily entail concurrence by the Group on the accuracy of the information received. Let me take this opportunity to commend the States that have responded to the questionnaire seeking information on the implementation of the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly. Fifty-one States have sent substantive replies to the questionnaire. Their co-operation is highly appreciated by the Group. I also wish to commend States that have responded to the Group's queries on individual cases of alleged violations. In their totality the responses from Governments have enabled the Group to arrive at a first-hand understanding of the complexities involved in this field. However, our work is still at an embryonic stage. The complexity of the issue, the vested interests at play and the limited resources at our disposal constitute ample evidence of the challenge before us. The insight we have gained is not complete and cannot be so until all Governments decide to join the Group in its efforts. It is my sincere hope that the international community will realize what is at stake here and extend its full co-operation to the Group. As for the Group itself, more work is needed, and great responsibilities lie ;lhead of us. Continued efforts are required to see to it that all oil-exporting and Jil-Shipping States adopt legislative and other measures to ensure the scrupulous implementation of the oil embargoes that have been introduced against South \frica. The Group will continue to advocate a mandatory oil embargo against South \frica. Contacts already established with oil-exporting and oil-shipping States ;Ire to be strengthened. Furthermore, there is an essential need for the Group to 3trengthen its data base to ensure that accurate and complete information is Jrovided to the Group on South Africa's imports of oil and petroleum products. The ~roup is ready to consider ways and means to achieve this. Similarly, the 3nalysing capacity of the Group should be enhanced. As Chairman of the Group, I submit that a two-pronged approach could be useful in this respect. As far as the short term is concerned, the Group has not :ompleted its mandate and it will continue its activities in the year ahead of us. ?or this purpose, a modest allocation of resources to the Group is deemed lecessary. S irnul taneously a long-term perspective has to be developed whereby the Group also considers the establishment of more sophisticated procedures to monitor the supply of oil and petroleum products to South Africa. It is my hope that a comprehensive proposal to this effect may be worked out by the Group and presented to the General Assembly at its forty-third session. The Group is determined to contribute to bringing about a total halt in the supply of oil and petroleum products to South Africa if the abhorrent system of apartheid is not eradicated. Thus it is up to Pretoria to make the choice: either the eradication of apartheid through peaceful means or economic isolation through a gradual choking of its arteries. I appeal to the South African Government to avoid the latter option by immediately and unconditionally initiating negotiations with representatives of the black majority population. On this note, before concluding my statement, I wish to thank the Vice-Chairman of the Group, Ms. Nabeela Al Mulla, who has ably taken care of the Group's meetings in my absence and has offered her advice and co-operation. Likewise, I extend my appreciation to the Rapporteur, Mr. Chagula, for his support and co-operation. I should like also to commend the other members of the Group for the spirit of mutual understanding and trust that has pervaded our deliberations. Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to the Secretariat, under the competent guidance of Mr. Mousouris, Assistant Secretary-General in the Centre against Apartheid, for its unswerving support. Ms. CHEE (Singapore): Apartheid is an evil system founded on the world view that a minority has the right to dominate and deny basic political and human rights to a majority on the basis of skin pigment. That such an outrageous doctrine can be blatantly propounded for an extended period of 40 years in the twentieth century is a blight on our record in the progressive march through history and in the ascent of man. The international community cannot stand by and allow this doctrine or the system to survive and enter the twenty-first century. We should beware the fact that apartheid is virulent, resilient and adaptive. The regime that authored the grand design of social engineering possesses the ~litical will to survive and to preserve its privileges and domination in the face of mounting internal and international pressures. Apartheid has the quality of a ~litical chameleon, but, whatever its guise, the fundamental nature is still the same. This should never be overlooked or excused. In recent years some changes have been introduced within South Africa. For the whites who have grown up in the unadulterated apartheid society, these changes are viewed as major and meaningful concessions. '!he notorious pass laws have been abolished; the segregationist legislation concerning public places has been revised; black trade unionists have been recognized. This year "betterment schemes" have been introduced, and there is the proposal to establish an advisory national council to work towards constitutional dispensation. Among the black population these reforms are seen for what they are - mere cosmetic and tactical changes to entrench apartheid, to defuse the growing political crisis in the country. It knows them as yet another round of change w~hout change and government by semantics. No sooner is one set of laws revised than another set more elaborate arises to replace them and carry out the same intent. At the core, reforms do not address legitimate black South African aspirations. What black South Africans want is the uprooting of the apartheid system, the right to enjoy the principle of one man, one vote, and the right to shape and control their own destiny. What, then, must the international community do to hasten the end of the Pretoria regime and help bring about a political solution in South Africa? Our first and foremost obligation is strongly to reaffirm unanimous and complete support for the black struggle in South Africa. Our second and equally important task is to turn our rhetoric into effective action by applying meaningful pressure through all channels on South Africa. As the Reverend Desmond Tutu put it so lucidly in his book, Hope and Suffering: "The international community must make up its mind whether it wants to see a possible resolution of the South African crisis or not. If it does, then let it apply pressure (diplomatic, political but, above all, economic) on the South African Government to persuade them to go to the negotiating table with authentic leaders of all sections of the South African population before it is too late." The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), of which Singapore is a member, solidly supports the anti-apartheid struggle. At a recent ASEAN meeting held on 16 June 1987, the Foreign Ministers of the six member States cal~ed On the Pretoria regime to abolish the apartheid system, immediately revoke the state of emergency and the repressive measures and release unconditionally all the political prisoners and detainees. The six Foreign Ministers also supported the application of comprehensive and mandatory sanctions on the Pretoria regime in accordance with the United Nations Charter as an effective means to achieve this objective. My delegation would like to underline the view that the imposition of comprehensive and mandatory economic sanctions is essential if we are to bring peaceful change to South Africa. The United Nations is the only organization that can mandate sanctions that are virtually universal. There are, however, some people who oppose sanctions. They use two arguments, which we will demonstrate here are completely false. It is said by opponents of sanctions against South Africa that blacks rather than whites will suffer more; therefore sanctions should not be imposed. Those who argue this way obviously do not know how incredibly bad conditions are. They could be no worse. It is instructive to look at the case of Southern Rhodesia, when sanctions were discussed. Speaking to the United Nations-sponsored World Conference on Sanctions against Racist South Africa held in June 1986, the Zimbabwean Minister for Foreign A.ffairs, Mr. Witness Mangwende, said that while Africans bore the brunt of United Nations sanctions against southern Africa "at no stage did the blacks in Zimbabwe or the neighbouring States ever ask for the lifting of the sanctions. On the contrary, they called for a more The British Government's Pearce Commission, in investigations in Southern Rhodesia in 1972, found that Africans supported the retention of sanctions in spite of the heavy burdens they imposed on the Afr ican population. 'l'hey were willing to bear the sacrifices to achieve the objective. There is no· reason to believe that the black population in southern Africa would react differently. Another argument used by opponents of sanctions is that they will not work. The evidence, however, suggests otherwise. South Africa today is extremely reliant upon international trade and investment for its economic well-being and growth. In November 1985, the Standard Bank Review made the following report on South Africa: "As a small relatively open economy, the country's prosperity is based to a great extent on its ability to freely sell materials and products abroad. In turn, South Africa is dependent on the outside world for many essential inputs". Foreign trade constitutes 55 per cent of South Africa's gross domestic product (GDP). Capital goods such as advanced technology, transport equipment and power generators comprise 40 per cent of all South Africa's imports. Petroleum and military goods constitute another one third of the total import bill. South Africa also does not have the capability to produce the most advanced machinery components and spare parts, either on the scale needed or at all. In addition, South Africa's massive foreign debt, equivalent to one third of its GDP, makes it one of the world's top debtor nations. In short, South Africa's dependence on Western goods, services, investments and finance increases its economic vulnerability. without explicitly labelling their actions as sanctions, international banks have shown their ability to break the South African economy. with business confidence at an all-time low after the declaration of the state of emergency in JUly 1985, international banks began cutting off new funds to South Africa. The actions of these banks caused a chain reaction, with other banks following suit. As we know, on 1 September 1985 the South African Government announced a four-month moratorium on the repayment of South Africa's $14 billion foreign debt, which was due at the end of the year. The point about South Africa's vulnerability and its concern about economic sanctions was again reflected in the report of the Commonwealth Eminent Persons' Group, which states: "We are convinced that the South African Government is concerned about the adoption of effective economic measures against it. If it comes to the conclusion that it would always remain protected from such measures, the process of change in South Africa is unlikely to increase in momentum and the descent into violence would be accelerated. In these circumstances, the cost in lives may have to be counted in millions." Therefore, those who oppose the imposition of sanctions are not doing anyone, least of all the whites or the black South Africans, a favour. Sooner or later, apartheid will have to be dismantlea. The process would surely be hastened in a non-violent way if the international community could adopt comprehensive and mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa. Time is running out for the Pretoria regime. Today, resistance to apartheid is all pervasive among the blacks in South Africa. Throughout 1987 there was nationwide popular mobilization and opposition to the regime in spite of the increased repression and co-ordinated violence by the security forces and vigilante groups. Blacks have lost their fear of death. They fear only an apartheid future and are prepared to pay the price to be rid of apartheid. But what Pretoria must be watching with even greater anxiety is the crumbling of the pillars that it has so carefully constructed to prop up the system. In 1986 the Dutch Reformed Church, once the spiritual bastion of apartheid, withdrew its theological sanction for apartheid. On 12 July 1987 a meeting took place in Dakar, Senegal, which was attended by 61 South Africans, of whom the majority were Afrikaans-speaking persons and a 17-person delegation from the African National Congress (ANC). This represented a historic meeting of a united, multiracial effort to struggle against apartheid. The Conference unanimously expressed a preference for a negotiated resolution of the South African question. Then again on 27 September 1987, 800 delegates met in a nationwide meeting of South African white groups to oppose the apartheid system. They plan to hold more meetings across South Africa to involve thousands of other whites. On 27 October 1987, The New York Times reported that several South African universities - at Witwatersrand, Natal, Cape Town, the Rhodes University at Grahamstown and the University of Western Cape - demonstrated against a Government decree requiring universities to crack down and report on anti-apartheid activists to the Education Minister in exchange for State subsidies. The Pretoria regime is caught in an acute dilemma. Like all failed obsolete orders it lives for the day. It does this by intensifying its repression at home and its aggression against its neighbours. Repression against trade unionists and leaders of community and religious organizations has been going on for decades. But in recent years the reg ime has taken action against young people and children. According to figures released by the Detainees I Parents Suppor t Committee, 40 per cent of the 30,000 persons detained since 1986 are children under 18 years of age. Many of these children have also been seriously injured. During the International Conference on Children, Repression and the Law of Apartheid in South Africa, held in Harare, Zimbabwe, this year, the international community heard testimony from children who said they were beaten, given electric shocks and subjected to other forms of physical and mental abuse while in police detention. Pretoria's reign of terror and repression does not stop at its own borders. The South African Government has not only authorized strikes against suspected African National Congress (ANC) hases and offices in neighbouring countries, but ~s alsb become involved in direct and indirect efforts to destabilize their Governments. Such aggression has resulted in more than lUO,OOO deaths in Mozambiaue alone. Other countries of the region have also not been spared. According to the report of the Special Committee Against Apartheid, it is estimated that in the five years from 1980 to 1984 the Pretoria regime's aggression and destabilization have cost the nine countries of the Southern African Development CO-ordination Conference (SADCC) more than $10 billion and that, by the end of 1986, the figure had risen to $18 billion. South Africa is an impediment to ~conomic development in southern Africa. We must compel Pretoria, through :omprehensive mandatory economic sanctions, to come to its senses and submit to naj or i ty rule. In the face of mounting international external pressure, the South African ;overnment has in recent years instituted with greater urgency a number of changes )r reforms to the apartheid system. This disposition is brought out in the futile, laive and often irrational attempts and efforts to salvage aparthein. ~he recent proposal by the South African Government to set up a council ~mprising nine elected black members and at least 20 appointed members to discuss Ind to advise the Government on so-called constitutional changes is hut another llch step in reforming the ahhorrent apartheid system. It is no wonder that nti-apartheid groups and black leaders in South Africa have rejected this plan ffered by the regime. The plan does not address the core issue of granting blacks he same politicol rights as Whites. Rather than continuing its futile policy of aggression and so-called reforms the South African Government should seriously work towards the full integration of blacks in the country's social and political structures. In this co~text, my delegation welcomes the release of Mr. Govan Mbeki, speaker of the A.frican National Congress who had been impr isoned since 1964. However, as pointed out by the Special Committee against Apartheid, the release of Mr. Mbeki can acauire real meaning only if it is seen as a first step towards the eradication of apartheid. The South African Government should follow this up by implementing the following additional measures: First, dismantle the system of apartheid; secondly, release all political prisoners and detainees; thirdly, lift the state of emergency; fourthly, unban national liberation movements and all politj~al exiles; and, fifthly, begin a process of dialogue with the true representatives of black South Africans, especially Nelson Mandela. As Mr. Mbeki has said, a free Mandela can and would bend all his efforts towards a peaceful solution in South Afr ica. These steps should be implemented immediately. The future of South Africa belongs to the majori ty of its people. ~r. MARWAT (Pakistan): Apartheid - the pOlicies of racial discrimination as enforced in the Republic of South Afr ica has been before the united Nations in one form or another since 1946. Since 1948, the Government of South Africa has enacted a whole complex of laws and regulations designed to give effect to its policy of apartheid - the most systematic form of racial discrimination practised by the GOlTernment of South Africa as an official policy of legalized and institutionalized racial segregation. The black people of South Africa are denied their most fundamental rights and liberties. They are not allowed to participate in the GOlTernment and are subject to hundreds of repressive laws and regulations. " The racist structure of apartheid imposed by the white minority in South Africa is at present confronting a serious challenge. For the past several years, the Pretoria regime has sought to insulate itself from the black liberation movements - the South West Africa People's Organization (S\qAPO) and the African National Congress - by mounting repeated incursions against zambia, ~ngola, Botswana, Zimhabwe, Mozambiaue and Lesotho. Acts of armed aggression, state terrorism, suhversion and economic destabilization are the ingredients of Pretoria's foreign strategy. However, the South African people's resistance against that tyrannical regime has continued and Pretoria has reacted with more than characteristic brutality to the urban protests. In the face of a popular revolt the Pretoria regime has further accentuated its repression against the people of South Africa. The state of emergency, indiscriminate killings and arbitrary arrests of the innocent black people of South Africa are an affront to the conscience of humanity. In order to deflect growing international criticisms of its abhorrent policy, the Pretoria regime has announced a make-believe programme of reforms to phase out apartheid. However, this cosmetic retouching cannot hide the ugly face of apartheid. My Government fully supports the recommendations of the International Conference on Sanctions against Racist South Africa, held in Paris in June 1986, call lng for an immediate and concrete glohal programme of action to aholish ~rartheid without delay and to establish a non-racial democratic state, based on universal and majority rule in South Africa. The imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions are the most appropriate and effective peaceful means availahle to the international community to eliminate apartheid. The policy of "constrnctive engagement" suggested hy some countries has proved to be a failure, and if the Pretoria regime comes to the conclusion th~t it will always remain protected from mandatory sanctions, the process of change in South l\frica is unlikely to increase in momentum and descent into violence will he accelerated. '1'he auestion is not whether such measures will compel changp.; it is already the case that their absence, and Pretoria's belief that they need not he feared, defers change. In this context, we welcome the growing sentiment and movement against apartheid in Western Europe and North America and have noted with satisfaction the imposition of selective sanctions against South Africa by several Governments in the region. My Government also joins in the call for the immediate independence of Namibia. The Namibian people must be freed of the illegal occupation immediately and unconditionally. We would also call on the international community to exert pressure upon the Pretoria regime to desist from the acts of subversion and terrorism perpetrated by that racist regime against the front-line and other neighbouring States in an attempt to overthrow their legitimate Governments. The odious policies of racial discrimination and apartheid are repugnant to Islam's fundamental spirit and principles. Islam is a religion which is an exponent of peace, human dignity, justice and equality. It does not believe in racial discrimination and human exploitation in any form. The Holy prophet Muhammad - peace be upon him - about 1,400 years ago, in his last sermon, said that all human beings are equal by birth; the white has no superiority over black, nor the black over white. He further said that the standard of superiority was the degree of piety and righteousness. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is opposed to racial discrimination and apartheid in all its forms. Pakistan has for many years imposed a total diplomatic, political, economic, Shipping and air boycott of South Africa. Pakistan is faithfully implementing the arms embargo imposed against South Afr ica and does not maintain any sports, cultural or other contacts with South Africa. The Pakistan Government condemns apartheid and supports the adoption of effective measures by the United Nations, includiny the imposition of comprehensive and mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter, to secure elimination of racial discrimination, oppression and exploitation in South Afr ica and establishment of majority rule. The forty-second session of the General Assembly has a historica.l and moral responsibility to agree on effective measures for the el imination of apartheid. The present stage may be the final opportunity to promote a peaceful solution of the situation in South Africa. "Constructive engagement" has failed manifestly and, it is an illusion that this regime can be reformed. More effective measures are required. While welcoming the sanctions and restrictions voluntar ily imposed by various countries, including the Western countries, we are of the view that these should be broadened into comprehensive and mandatory sanctions as called for by the non-aligned countries. The hour of decision is fast approaching. The oppressea people of South Africa have risen to defend their dignity. They have been subjected to untold misery and undergone great sacrifices. Common humanity entitles them to the political and material support of the world community. Pakistan will stand by the embattled people of South Africa until the pernicious system of apartheid has been dismantled and racial discrimination and domination have been demolished. We hope that Namibia will soon win its freedom. The demand for implementation of the plan for Namibia's independence, agreed since 1978, cannot be resisted indefinitely. The right of a people to self-determination cannot be held hostage to global power-politics. Namibia I s freedom cannot be made dependent on developments in neighbouring Angola. My Government has extended full recognition to the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) and I assure it of Pakistan's unswerving support in its historic struggle for liberty and independenc' Mr. GHAREKHAN (India): Even though hundreds of speeches have been made from this rostrum for four decades denouncing apartheid and calling for concerted international action to put an end to that inhuman system, apartheid continues to survive. It is imperative that we make our voices heard again and again to express our solidarity with those who struggle to destroy it, and to implore those who continue to collaborate with the apartheid regime to cease their obstruction of international action under the auspices of the United Nations. As long ago as 1952 the Asian-African States requested the General Assembly to consider the danger of race conflict arising from apartheid and warned that this would lead to increasing tension and conflict. Today we are confronted not with a mere threat but with the reality of the detention, beating, torture and killing of hundreds of men, women and children in South Africa and a state of perpetual war by the apartheid regime against front-line States. The racist regime recognizes no law and no norms of international behaviour. Thanks to the protection it receives from its friends, it has enjoyed immunity for longer than even the Nazi r€gime in Germany. On 7 November 1962, the day after the General Assembly adopted resolution 1761 (XVII) calling for sanctions against South Africa, Nelson Mandela told the court in Pretoria: "I hate the practice of race discrimination and in my hatred I am sustained by the fact that the overwhelming majority of mankind hate it equally. I hate the systematic inculcation of children with colour prejudice and I am sustained in that hatred by the fact that the overwhelming majority of mankind, here and abroad, are with ~e in that. I hate the racial arrogance with decrees that the good things of life shall be retained as the exclusive right of a minority of the population and which reduces the majority of the population to a position of subservience and inferiority and maintains them as voiceless chattels, to work where they are told and behave as they are told by the ruling minority. I am sustained in that hatred by the fact that the overwhelming majority of mankind both in this country and abroad are with me". Let us assure Nelson Mandela and his people, in words and action, that a vast majority of us continue to support his and his people's just struggle. (Mr. Gharekhan, India) Despite the utmost brutalities of the oppressors, the movement for freedom has remained steadfast in its attachment to the principles of non-racialism and democracy, to the ideal of buliding a society in which all the people of South ~frica - black, white and brown - enjoy human dignity and human rights on an equal footing. India does not support armed struggle for the sake of violence. As is known, we won our independence through a non-violent struggle. Even in South Africa the freedom movements tried non-violent methods for many years. Even now we believe that comprehensive mandatory sanctions are the only possible peaceful means to bring about an end to apartheid, but this approach is not supported by those most in a position to hurt South Africa's economy. It was only after the Sharpeville massacre and the banning of the people's organizations that the liberation movements felt obliged to have recourse to arms. It is not the military might of the racist regime but the restraint and vision of the liberation movements that has spared the lives of innocent people. It is tragic that the apartheid regime has taken advantage of the humanism of the freedom movements to reinforce repression and terror. Apartheid is the very antithesis ot civilized humanity. It is demeaning and abhorrent. It is a system nourished on violence, which can only breed further violence. It helps a tyrannical minority regime to maintain its stranglehold on the oppressed majority. It is the root cause of all the instability and tension that afflict southern Africa, whether it be the deliberate degradation of the people of South Africa by the racist regime, or Pretoria's continued illegal occupation of Namibia, or its aggression against and subversion of independent African States of the region. Pretoria deceives no one by its professions of reform or of a desire for peaceful coexistence with its neighbours. Its aim is clearly to further entrench racist minority rule and to establish hegemony over southern Africa. The Movement of Non-Aligned Countries set up the Action for Resisting Invasion, Colonialism and Apartheid (AFRICA) Fund in Harare last year, with India as Chairman of the nine-member Committee. The Assembly may be aware tnat a plan of action was adopted identifying priority areas which require assistance. I should like to express our appreciation to the many Governments which have made generous contributions and pledges to the Fund, now totalling over $US 200 million, and to the United Nations and other agencies which have lent their co-operation. I take this opportunity to extend an appeal to all Member States for support of the Fund. The Fund is, of course, a complement and in no way an alternative to comprehensive mandatory sanctions against the apartheid regime and to other action to end the oppression in South Africa and Namibia. I should like to conclude my few remarks by quoting from my Prime Minister's statement at a recent Commonwealth leaders' conference held in Vancouver. He said: "Let us remember that in the final reckoning it is not we who will bring about a change in South Africa but the people of South Africa themselves. They will win - through their valour, their inflexible will, their infinite capacity for sacrifice. They have borne much. They will bear more. Let us not underrate the revolutionary might of the freedom fighters. We know from experience in India that the dawn breaks when the night appears at its darkest. Black, brown and white must unite." Mr. DELPECH (Argentina) (interpretation from Spanish): The persistence of apartheid represents one of the most grave and urgent problems confronting the international community. The continued existence of a system based on intolerance (Mr. Gharekhan, India) and racial discrimination is unacceptable at the close of a century which has ~itnessed unprecedented progress in the technological and social spheres. Now, more than ever before, it is necessary for the international community to unite to implement the measures necessary to ensure that South Africa eradicates apartheid totally and definitively. The policies and practices of apartheid applied by the racist regime in South Africa, in addition to their grave consequences within the country itself, constitute a grave threat to regional and international peace and security. It is that very policy which inspires the per iodic acts of aggression by Pretor ia against neighbouring countries. Angola is at this very time the object of an unjustifiable armed attack by Pretoria. The great majority of the international community, aware of this situation, has reflected in the resolutions of the General Assembly its complete rejection and condemnation of the racist regime. None the less, Pretoria, far from acknowledging its obligation to put an immediate end to its odious and inadmissable policy of racial discr imination, has chosen to adopt measures designed to perpetuate apartheid. This unwillingness to eliminate the most violent and offensive manifestations of the discriminatory regime fully justifies the growing active resistance of the oppressed people of South Africa, wbich deserves the sympathy and support of all States represented here. In this context, the recent decision to release some political prisoners is a step in the right direction. It is essential, however, that this measure be followed by other similar ones leading to the release of Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners. My country has repeatedly and most energetically condemned apartheid as a crime against humanity and has unequivocally demonstrated its solidarity with its (Mr. Delpech, Argentina) victims. However, conscious that declarations are not enough, my Government has adopted important practical measures, including the breaking off of diplomatic relations with South Africa. Furthermore, the Argentine Government is strictly applying the mandatory arms embargo against South Afr ica and has ratified the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Cr ime of Apartheid. Similarly, we are members of the Committee of the Action for Resistance to Invasion, Colonialism and Apartheid (AFRICA) Fund, set up at the eighth summit Conference of non-aligned countr ies, held in Harare last year. All these actions reflect the firm support that Argentina is giving to the struggle of Africa against racial discrimination. The individual action of States, although useful, is not enough. We have often affirmed, and we emphasize today, that only concerted action on the part of all Members of the united Nations, including those that have the most significant relations with Pretoria, can prove an effective tool in the struggle against apartheid. Thus, in February of this year, Argentina, as a non-permanent member of the Security Council, joined in sponsoring a draft resolution containing a list of specific and important sanctions to be applied against the Pretor ia Government. Unfortunately, the draft resolution was not given the necessary suppor t for adoption in that body. There can be no doubt as to the danger that apartheid poses to international peace and security. The lack of an adequate response on the part of the united Nations will not only prolong the tragedy of a people unlawfully depr i ved of its fundamental rights but will dangerously conspire against the credibility and political and moral authority of our Organization. Mr. VRAALSEN (Norway): Since the General Assembly last met to discuss apartheid, one year ago, the situation in South Africa has deteriorated further, reaching a critical stage. The black majority is no longer willing to tolerate ,outh Africa's system of segregation and racial repression, and is demanding the )bvious right to be treated as eaual citizens with full political rights. Instead )f addressing those legitimate demands, the South African Government has maintained .ts nationwide state of emergency. During the past year several hundred persons ave been killed and thousands of apartheid opponents detained. It is particularly epugnant in this context that even children have heen subjected to detention and Drture by the South African authorities. My Government strongly condemns these llegal acts of subjugation. This policy of oppression will only lead to 5calating violence, increased bloodshed and prolonged suffering for the people of )uth Africa. Attempts to hide these facts through harsher censorship measures LII not fool the world. South Africa is the only country that has made race the basis of political .ghts. Apartheid betrays the most fundamental concepts of human liberty and uality. We reject any notion that apartheid can be reformed. It must be mpletely abolished. At the same time South Africa continues its destabili7.ing policy in the gion. Norway condemns South Africa's continued aggression against neighbouring 3tes. ~he constant source of tension that the apartheid represents in the Jthern African region is yet another reason why something urgently needs to be le to eradicate this inhuman system. We should like to express our solidarity :h all front-line States and assure them of our continued support in the face of th African aggression. Despite universal condemnation, the South African Government has so far refused to take meaningful or definite steps towards ending its racist policy. The Government of South Africa has to recognize that the present agony of that country signals the end of apartheid once and for all. Pretoria has to make the choice of either letting the situation continue to deteriorate and develop into a catastrophic race war or addressing the fundamental problems of that divided nation. It is not for my Government to present a blueprint for a post-apartheid South Africa. The essential reauirement is that apartheid be abolished in all its forms and that the south African Government show a genuine \~illingness to enter into negotiations with the true leaders of the hlack majority. We therefore appeal to the South African Government to lift the state of emergency, to release Nelson Mandela and all other political prisoners, to lift the ban on all political organizations and to allow all exiles to return to South Africa. Only if those conditions are met can we have reason to hope for negotiations on the peaceful abolition of apartheid in south Africa. The recent release of Govan Mbeki, speaker of the African National Congress of South Africa (ANe), and other: political prisoners is a victory for those who have waged the struggle for the release of all political prisoners in South Africa. Whether that act by the South African Government portends a new attitude towards the question of political prisoners remains to be seen. So far j suffice it to say that the regime should be judged by its deeds and that there is still a long way to go before the conditions are complied with. The policy of trying to abolish apartheid through dialogue with the racist regime has been attempted repeatedly without success. My Government has arr ived at the conclusion that the South African regime is still unprepared for genuine dialogue and that outside pressure is essential for any prospect for peaceful change. In our opinion, increased international pressure is the only avenue left to eradicate apartheid by peaceful means. The Norwegian Government therefore urges the Security Council to impose comprehensive mandatory sanctions against south Africa. I take this opportunity to call upon those countries that still oppose sanctions to reassess their attitude. The absence of mandatory sanctions should not be used as a pretext for failing to act against apartheid. Even limited measures may be important to sigDal disapproval of apartheid and to express solidarity with those who are working for change in South Africa. Pending mandatory sanctions by the Security Council, additional voluntary measures should be considered by the Council. Likewise, an effective oil embargo would have a particular potential for influencing South African society inasmuch as oil iB virtually the sole strategic raw material in which South Africa is not self-sufficient. The establishment of the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum >roducts to South Africa and its subseauent work represent the first concerted !ffort by the international community to provide a basis for an effective oil ~mbargo against South Africa. The Norwegian Government attaches particular .mportance to the activities of the Group and has participated actively in its 'ork. Whereas the Security Council has failed to reach agreement on comprehensive andatory sanctions, that should not preclude the Council from considering andatory sanctions in clearly defined fields, such as a ban on the supply and hipping of oil and petroleum products to South Africa. Sanctions are intended to tell South Africa where the world stands on a lest ion of good and evil. Without sanctions, or with a limited degree of pressure (Mr. Vraalsen, Norway) applied, the signals will remain mixed, which is precisely why sanctions must be kept and further strengthened. Sanctions have already proved to be of significance in hastening the end of racism. A promising ferment is at work among South Africa's whites, reflecting the message of outrage and frustration sent by individual Governments. (Mr. Vraalsen, Norway) Getting that message across is what the sanctions argument is all about. Though nobody believes that sanctions would hring about the immediate collapse of the Pretoria regime, there is every reason to assume that sanctions represent the only viable inducement for the regime to enter into negotiations. In the world of political realities this should be our paramount objective. Once the regime nemonstrates its willingness to negotiate, it will he incumbent upon the international society to explore the monalities for. dialogue. Once the underlying premise that sanctions work is accepted, it has been submitted that sanctions work only too well, and will hurt the black majority population rather than affect the echelons of power in South Africa. According to this argument sanctions will create increased sUffering for the black majority and cause economic difficulties for the neighbouring countries of South Africa. We do not underestimate these difficulties. But even though sanctions may cause hardships in the short run, representative black leaders argue that this is preferable to the prolonged sUffering that apartheid implies. ~he international society is obliged to listen to those leaders. Norway has for several years sought to comply with the principles just referred to, in the formulation of our policy on sanctions. In addition to the L985 Nordic Pr.ogramme of Action against South Africa, the Norwegian Parliament has ldopted an Act on Economic Boycott against South Africa and Namibia. ~he Act !ntered into force on 2u March 1987 and the provisions of the Act took effect from '0 JUly. The Act hans practically all economic relations with South Africa and amihia. It includes a general ban on imports and exports, a ban on the carriage f crude oil hy Norwegian vessels to or from South Africa and Namibia, the granting f loans and investments, as well as other measur~s. In this way we hope to make a opportunities for all. We also hope to inspire other countries to follow suit, to increase the combined international pressure against the apartheid system. In addition to these restrictive measures, my Government would like to stress the need for positive support for those who suffer the effects of apartheid. South Africa's neighbours find themselves in a particularly precarious situation, both because of their economic dependence on South Africa and as a result of South Africa's POlicy of destabilization in the region. To ensure sustained development, independent of South Africa's economic might, Norway, for several years, has offered assistance to the Southern African Development Co-ordination Confecence (SADCC) and the SADCC countries. The Norwegian Government has also made it clear that it will be prepared to assist the SADCC countries in the event of further South African countermeasures against these countries. Norway, furthermore, provides humanitarian assistance to liberation movements, refugees and other victims of apartheid. This support has increased considerably during the latest years and Norway will continue its assistance to these groups, as well as to the front-line States and the SADCC countries, ano to SAuce co-operation. Time is running out for a peaceful solution to the problems of South Africa. If apartheid is not abolished soon, the whole region of souti1ern Africa may explode in a violent upheaval - tor freedom is indivisible, and human dignity cannot forever be impaired, but shall in the end prevdll. in taking effective action against apartheid. The meeting rose at 12.05 p.m. (Mr. Vraalsen, Norway) Let us therefore all Join hands