A/42/PV.76 General Assembly

I do apologize, the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic has requested to speak on a point of order. Mr. ARNOUSS (Syrian Arab RepUblic) (interpretation from Arahic): The item we are discussing is "Policies of apartheid of the Government of south Africa". The speaker is out of order. He is speaking about co-operation between Arabs and Africans. This is not an item discussed by this General Assembly. We ask that his speech should be limited to policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa and the practices of that Government.

I would draw the attention of the Assembly to the fact that we were considering agenda item 33, which is entitled "Policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa". I would request the representative of Israel to continue his statement. who spoke on a point of order? If I am not mistaken, I was sitting near the desk of the Israel delegation when the representative of Syria - I am not sure whether it was the same gentleman who made a statement on this issue; we can check it, of course, as his statement was pUblished. He stated that my country, Israel - of course, he was not able to put the name "Israel" on his lips - was a Nazi regime, the ideologies of Israel and South Africa were the same. I do not think that has anything to do with item 33, but, in any event, we did not make any points of order and we let him continue. The Foreign Minister of Chad addressed the issue of Arab mercenaries fighting with Libya against Chad and declared before this Assembly: W••• we were astonished to learn that Palestinian brothers have been recruited, at considerable cost, to fight against the people of Chad in Chad~ Are we to understand that our Palestinian brothers ••• are ••• merely giving in to the temptations of the international mercenary system? "We would ask the same ouestion of the Lebanese who have followed suit. Would those Lebanese not be better off striVing to protect the unity and independence of their own country?" (A/42/PV.25, p. 74-75) The President of Chad himself, AI-Hadj Bissein Habre, has confirmed the reports that Syria has sent its own mercenaries. On 12 October 1987, the Cairo daily El-Akbar reported that President Habre accused Syria of sending men and arms to help Libya fight the border war with Chad.

I do apologize. The representative of the Syrian Arab Republic has asked to speak on a point of order. Mr. ARNOUSS (Syrian Arab Republic) (interpretation from Arabic): As I said earlier, the item we are discussing is item 33, "Policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa". The speaker is still talking about items and things the ~partheid regime. I should like the President to ask the speaker to speak only about item 33.

I would once again draw attention to the fact that we are currently considering agenda item 33, entitled "Policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa". I would reauest speakers to bear this in mind. I should also like a hearing to be given to the representative of Israel until he has concluded his statement. Mr. JOFFE (Israel): I am at the end of my quotation about what President Sabre said about Syria. He said: "Syria is send ing mercenar ies, pilots, planes and tanks and all par t icipated in the Aouzo battle". Now, the Syrian representative can rest. This kind of distortion and hypocrisy has characterized the discussion of Israel's attitude towards South Africa for many years. We are accused of conducting massive trade with South Africa, and we are singled out as having uniaue co-operation with South Africa in virtually every field. These claims, too, are blatantly false. I bring the attention of the Gener.al Assembly to the report of the Special Committee in document A/42/22, paragraph 66 of which states that: "Western European and North American countries ••• continued to be the main trading partners of South Africa". The report auotes from the united Nations Commodity Trade Statistics, Series D (1985-1986), listing the 14 main trading partners of South Africa. Is ael is not among them. The tactic of some Arab countries has been to blow up Israel's alleged relations with South Africa in order to ensure an immunity from public exposure Jf. their own trade and links with South Africa. For the past two years the Israeli Mission to the United Nations has brougJ .):', to the attention of the General Assembly the findings of the research carried Ol by the Shipping Research Bureau, a Netherlands anti-apartheid organization, monitoring tankers delivering oil to South Africa. The united Nations has taken these allegations seriously. An intergovernmental group to monitor the supply and shipping of oil and petroleum products of South Africa has been set up by the General Assembly. In its first report (A/42/45), which was distributed only two days ago, Annex Ill, pages 49 to 58, deals with ·Cases of Violations·. A number of Arab oil-exporting countri s are mentioned, and they are being investigated. South Africa depends on imported oil and spends about $3 billion annually b buy it. From 1980 to 1984 Arab oil exports to South Africa amounted to nearly $US 10 billion. In 1981 38 per cent of South Africa's oil reserves were suppliel by some Arab countries. In 1984 it rose to 76 per cent, and in 1985 an amazing percentage - 95 per cent of South African oil originated from Arab sources. This was confirmed on 9 July 1985 by Mr. Froysness, state Secretary of Norway's Foreign Ministry, who said in Oslo: "Ninety-five per cent of the oil supplied to South Africa comes from Arab countries around the Persian Gulf - with over half shipped directly to Soutt Africa." The facts are clear. Nevertheless, Israel continues to he singled out and judged by a double standard. Apartheid is too great an evil to be cynically manipulated by a campaign of defamation and slander, perpetrated as a tool of obsessive hatred against my country. Instead there should be unity for the benefit of all mankind in a common effort to wipe out apartheid and all other forms of fascism, discrimination and intolerance that plague our world. Mr. LI Luye (China) (interpretation from Chinese): The policy of apartheid in South Africa is one of the oldest and most important items on the agenda of the United Nations General Assembly, which began its consideration 35 years ago. During this long period of time, the General Assembly has adopted many resolutions calling for the immediate abolition of the apartheid system in South Africa and an early end of this savage rule which is an affront to human dignity. These resolutions, however, have been brazenly rejected by the South African authorities year after year. The international community has called for joint stern sanction measures against the South African authorities. Yet, year after year this just demand has failed to he implemented ow_~ng to the obstruction motivated by selfish interest and stubborn prejudice. AS a reSUlt, our black brothers who have been deprived of their fundamental human rights are still subjected to untold sufferings. They fervently appeal to the conscience of, and anxiously look to, the international community to uphold justice for them. It is high time that we responded to their call with concrete actions. In order to abolish apartheid and establish a democratic and non-racial society, the South African people have waged wave upon wave a protracted and arduous struggle. This struggle is now surging forward in depth and width. Activities of resistance in all forms are being carried out throughout the apartheid system and joined their black compatriots in the struggle to smash the racial barrier and establish a civilized society of democracy and racial equality, In August this year, 340,UOO South African black miners went on a mammoth strike, demonstrating the enormous strength and new awakening of the South Africar people. This has eloauently proved that the South African people's determination to bury apartheid is an irrestible trend and that apartheid is doomed to failure. The just struggle of the South African people has aroused the serious concern of the international community and the people of the world, who extend to them dee sympathy and eKtensive support. In recent years in particular, in every corner of the earth, the mass movement condemning apartheid in south Africa and calling on all Governments to support the struggle of the South African people is forging ahead unceasinqly and forming into a powerful force of public opinion. It is heartening to note that in some Western countries, mass organizations such as trad4 unions and youth and women's organizations have initiated various activities which have proved to be very effective in mobilizing public opinion and heightening the awareness of the evils of apartheid. Facts have amply proved that the world's people stand on the side of the South African people and that the South African authorities have become the target of public condemnation and landed themselves in an extremely isolated position. The African front-line states have all along stood in the forefront of the struggle against racism in South Africa. Sharing a common fate with the South African people, they regard their support for the just struggle of the South African people as the continuation of the cause of perfecting their own independence. Proceeding from this belief, they have undertaken major obligations at huge cost. Without their powerful backing for the South African people, the struggle against racism would have been much more difficult. History will record their great contributions to the progress of mankind. We should extend to them our firm solidarity and highest tribute. Here, 1 wish to thank the Special Committee against Apartheid in particular for the substantial work it has done for so many years. The Pretoria regime, under the strong domestic resistance and the mounting pressure of world opinion, has not turned merciful. On the contrary, i~ has reinforced its repressive machinery and intensified its military oppression against the struggle of the South African people. The South African military police have brutally beaten, wantonly arrested and detained black people without trial. According to the data provided by the Special Committee against Apartheid, more than 2,300 people have been killed in cold blood since September 1984 and around 30,000 people have been detained since June 1986, 40 per cent of whom are children under 18. Terror reigns in the land of South Africa. (Mr. Li Luye, China) Last May the South African authorities carried out whites-only elections further to consolidate their racist rule, and thereafter once again extended the state of emergency. At the Same time, they have imposed strict censorship in an attempt to cover up their crimes and hoodwink world opinion. While intensifying their suppression, the South African authorities have not given up their deceptive manoeuvres. They have proposed so-called reform measures of all kinds and hypocritically expressed their willingness to conduct negotiations and share pOwer with the black people. Recently they have even dished up the idea of establishing the so-called National Statutory Council, with hlack representation. Yet they have refused to release black leader Nelson Mandela and others, end the ban on liberation organizations and lift the state of emergency; they have continued to pursue the policy of bantustanization and the Group Areas Act, and stuck to their obstinate position of depriving the black people of their right to vote, under the pretext that this is required by special historical circumstances. All that fully proves that the so-called reforms of the Botha regime are othing but cosmetics, used to embellish the notorious system of apartheid. It is no wonder that as soon as these proposals raised their ugly heads they were repudiated by the black people and the liberation organizations in south Africa. The answer of the black people is that apartheid cannot be reformed; it can only be abolished. The South African authorities regard the front-line States' persisting in their struggle against apartheid as a thorn in their side. They have repeatedly carried out political subversion, economic sabotage and armed invasion against these countries. Over the past year South Africa has invaded Angola on many occasions and attacked Zambia, zimbabwe and Mozambique one after another. It has also brazenly fostered the anti-Government elements in neighbouring countries and instigated them to disrupt the peaceful life there. Backed by South Africa, the armed bandits in Mozambique have carried out several raids on Mozambican villages and ruthlessly massacred innocent inhabitants. To this very day, the South African authorities still refuse to implement Security Council resolution 435 (1978) and insist on their illegal occupation of Namibia. It is estimated that South Africa's armed attacks and economic pressure have cost neighbouring countr ies several : thousand casualties, over 1 million refugees and at least $US 10 billion in economic damage. Apartheid has become the root cause of turbulence in southern Africa, and it poses a grave threat to international peace and security. The South African authorities' stubborn persistence in the reactionary apartheid system is inseparable from the connivance and indulgsnce of a big western country, whose double-standards on the auestion of sanctions are known to all. If we make a little effort to analyse the various explanations offered by it for its exceptionally lenient attitude towards the South African authorities, we shall be able to see the self-contradictory nature of its logic. If it truly wants to prove that it is not acting out of narrow self-interest and deliberate hypocrisy, it should respond to the general demand of the international community and join other countries in adopting mandatory sanctions measures against South Africa. Facts over the years have proved that tolerance and indulgence towards the South African authorities can serve only to inflate their arrogance, and that persuasion cannot make them turn over a new leaf. Only when the international community is united and takes co-ordinated action to put the greatest possihle pres.sure on them will it be possible to force them to abandon the policies of apartheid. Here I wish to call on the international community, and especially the big western Powers, to make their due contributions to abolishing apartheid and restoring fundamental human rights to the South African people. The Chinese Government and people strongly condemn the perverse actions of the South African racist regime. We will, as always, continue to render unswerving support to the peoples of South Africa, Namibia and the front-line States in their just struggle, and to provide them with assistance to the best of our ability. The Chinese Government firmly supports any severe sanctions measures aimed at putting greater pressure on the South African authorities to force them to abolish the apartheid system. We are convinced that, with the support of the people of the world, the South African people and their liberation organizations, united as one and persevering in their protracted and unremitting struggle, will certainly bury the system of apartheid and realize the magnificent ideal of establishing a democratic and non-racial society in South Africa. Mr. NAVARRO RIVAS (Nicaragua) <interpretation from Spanish): As we look back over the past 12 months we can see a series of events that clearly show the accelerating trend towards the entrenchment of the two opposing and irreconcilable positions revealed by a study of the situation in South Africa and of the apartheid gime. On the one hand there is pretoria's determination to perpetuate and strengthen :he foundations of the apartheid system, and on the other there is the letermination of a people resolved to be free, and committed to achieving that loa1, whatever the cost, and whatever means must be used. Since with last May's Whites-only elections the minority racist Government has let out to attain two primary objectives. First, internally, Pretoria is seeking to destroy the democratic forces in the country and stifle the people's yearnings for freedom. Secondly, externally, by various ploys and false signals of willingness to negotiate and carry out reforms, South Africa is seeking to contain and defea~ the growing international campaign to impose comprehensive mandatory sanctions. However, things have reached such a pass in South Africa that Pretoria's tactics can already be seen to be doomed to failure. It has taken many years of struggle and thousands of victims to bring about the present state of affairs, which the racists are now seeking to reverse. Widespread repression has been the principal means employed by Pretoria to contain the people's demands for justice and dignity. South Africa is today a police StateJ since 1985 the regime has imposed successive states of emergency giving the security forces almost unlimited powers. Over that period thousands of South African patriots have died simply for opposing apartheid. In South Africa it is a crime to protest against a system that the General Assembly has characterized as criminal. Massive numbers of people have been put in prison. Men, women and e~en children are in the system's gaols, without any kind of legal protection or hope of justice. In their frenzied obsession with maintaining the system, the white racists have made African children a major target of their apparatus of repression and death. Of the 40,000 people detained since last year, 40 per cent have heen children under 18, and children aged 7 and 8 have been detained. Pretoria regards children, like history, as an irreconcilable enemy, since both symbolize change. The regime is seeking at all costs to stop the clock, and in that endea~our it has seen that children are the torch-bearers of the future. That is why Pretoria is lashing out at them. (Mr. Navarro Rivas, Nicaragua) witnessed t he growing unity and co-ordination of Over recent months we have the South ~frican people in all aspects of its struggle against apartheid. In Ju~ f unity Whl'ch has developed in the South African workers' and August the degree 0 movement became apparent. Repression, murder and threats could not split the more than 300,000 workers in the National Union of Mineworkers who came out on striketc demand the most basic of labour and human ri9hts. The strike proved to be the mOst: costly, most serious and longest in South Africa's history and clearly represented a milestone in the struggle of the South African people to shake off the yoke of apartheid. This same determination, unity and discipline is to be seen among the students, women and religious sectors. We can indeed see the unity of an entire people resolved to put an end to apartheid, their long night of slavery and sUffering. With a view to containing the wrath of the people and international pressure, pretoria has recently falsely intimated that it is prepared to negotiate and bring about reforms. It has renewed old promises of reform. The African National Congress of South Africa (ANC), which is this year celebrating the seventy-fifth anniversary of its foundation, has denounced these manoeuvres by Pretoria as a further tactic to prevent its isolation. The African National Congress of South Africa, which has always demonstrated a willingness to negotiate, has always opposed secret contacts with the regime since the South African people itself must participate in any negotiating process. Furthermore, it is wrong to talk about reforms to the system. Any negotiation must be directed to the primary objective of the South African people, and that is the transformation of their land into a united and non-racial democracy. Need we repeat that there is no room for reform where apartheid is concerned since reforming it would he tantamount to perpetuating this horrible system. The unconditional release of all south African political prisoners, led of course by Nelson Mandela and Zephaniah Mothopeng is a pre-condition for the attainment of any peaceful settlement in South Africa. A Latin American writer once wrote that "history is like a prophet looking over his shoulder and foretelling the future from the events and lessons of the past". In South Africa there is no doubt what will come. It is only a matter of time before apartheid vanishes and justice and peace prevail. The question is what will the price of this dream be. with its blood and tears the South African people is already winning its inalienable rights. The price it is paying is extremely high but it cannot wait any longer because it knows that freedom is not a commodity to be begged, freedom is something to be won. The international community must respond to the sacrifices of the South African people and must do its part in that struggle, which is a struggle for us all and not merely for the black South African people. It must also respond to the sacrifices of the front-line States, which have so bravely resisted the aggression, threats and destabilizing tactics by South Africa. The struggle against apartheid includes the extremely important factor of economic and material support for those countries and liberation movements. International assistance to the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference (SADCC) and to the Action for Resisting Invasion Colonialism and Apartheid (AFRICA) Fund must he increased. Likewise, Nicaragua would insist that with the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter the international community would be fulfilling a vital responsibility and contributing to the elimination of apartheid. In the Security Council some powerful allies of Pretoria have systematically blocked attempts to impose sanctions upon South Africa. They are well aware how effective sanctions and commercial embargoes, such as the one the United States ha imposed on my country, can be, but precisely because of that they are not applying h id system f rom which they also stand to benefit. them against apart e , a Bishop Desmond Tutu, referring to the shop-soiled excuses proffered by those opposed to sanctions, has said: "Some Western countries have rejected sanctions because they say that they would have most impact on the blacks. I hope that those who use this argument will be wise enough to withdraw it and to stop being so hypocritical." On the other hand, and as an alternative to the effectiveness of sanctions, they are implementing the rejected policy of constructive engagement, which has proved to be a mechanism effective only in maintaining the apartheid system and encouraging South Africa's actions of State terrorism. The policy has already been declared a failure by a panel appointed by that country's Government. However, it is continuing unaltered. Given this collaborative behaviour and the tragic internal situation, armed struggle has become the only alternative and the last hope of redemption for the oppressed people of South Africa. Peoples are not violent, they react to systems of violence. If we wish to end the violence in southern Africa let us end apartheid. It is curious to see how some people express concern at and protest against the legitimate violence of a people but prove powerless to protest against the violence and terror of apartheid. No people like war; war is something imposed on them. The fathers and grandfathers of the South African peoples died by violence. Now their brothers are dying Violently at Botha's hands. So 1 th' ong as 1S goes on and so long as international action against Pretoria is blocked we cannot ask the people to show If those who are concerned about armed struggle really want peace they should act decisively to eliminate this horrendous regime which is the very antithesis of peace. We cannot wait until it is too late. If we do not act while there is still time we shall soon see a conflagration whose impact on the entire region will he unpredictable. Those who today defend the status auo will then be faced with the implacable justice of history. Then we will see happening what was predicted by our own great poet, Ruben Dario, who said: ~No force will then be able to check the lethal flood of revenge. Like the trumpets at Jericho a new Marseillaise will be needed to bring down the walls of the transgressor. The statues of the wicked who oppressed the meek will be shattered and the heavens will ring in sombre glee with the thunder of catastrophic redemption. 11 Mr. KIKUCHI (Japan): In the year since the General Assembly last discussed this agenda item, the situation in South Africa has continued to deteriorate. The South African Government's policies of apartheid, which pervade every aspect of the social, economic and political life of the country, incite uprisings among the oppressed majority, provoke the hostility of the neighbouring African States and arouse outrage throughout the international community. Astonishingly, the Government of South Africa refuses to acknowledge what is clear to all the world, namely, that the source of its domestic troubles is the abhorrent and dehumanizing system of apartheid itself. Instead, Pretoria continues to try to suppress popUlar discontent with brute force, a futile strategy that has resulted in the loss of thousands of lives. Since reimposing a state of emergency almost one-and-a-half years ago, it has arbitrarily arrested and detained countless thousands of its citizens, including many children and youngsters, and it has tightened its restrictions on the press in a vain attempt to conceal from the rt t of the world the atrocities collUl\itted by its author Hies. Although South Africa held general elections last May, that exercise could by nOj§tr,etch of the imagination be regarded as part of a democratic process, since the elections were for a "whites only" Parliament. The black citizens, who constitute the overwhelming majority of the population, were barred from participating. Indeed, they continue to be deprived of all their fundamental At the same time, South Africa continues to launch military interventions and incursions into neighbouring states, turning a deaf ear to the outrage those actions engender throughout the international community. While its blatant military attacks in May of last year against Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe were still fresh in our memory, last month it again launched a large-scale military attack against Angola. Once again this year, Japan has to repeat the following demands of the Pretoria Government: Japan demands that South Africa take concrete and fundamental measures to abolish apartheid and present to the international community a credible timetable for the achievement of that goal. Japan demands that South Africa lift the state of emergency and release all detainees immediately. We demand the unconditional release of Nelson Mandela and all other political prisoners. While we welcome the recent release of Govan Mbeki, speaker of the African National Congress (ANe), and other political prisoners, we shall not interpret this action as a sign of true change until the South African Government releases all of its political prisoners. Japan demands that Pretoria lift forthwith the ban on anti-apartheid organizations such as the ANC and the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC), and enter into serious dialogue with these and other liberation movements representing the majority of the population. It should do so with a view to seeking ways and means of achieving the abolition of apartheid in a peaceful and expeditious mann r. We demand that South Africa refrain from military incursions into neighbour ng terr itor ies. We demand the dismantling of the so-called bantustan system. Finally, Japan demands that south Africa grant Namibia its rightful and long-overdue independence. Towards this end, Japan urges South Africa to co-operate with the Secretary-General in discharging the new mandate entrusted tl him by the Security Council in resolution 601 (1987) adopted on 3U October. Japan's steadfast opposition to apartheid is clearly reflected in the full co-operation it has extended to international efforts for its eradication, and il the range of policies and measures it has taken to apply pressure against South Africa. As everyone knows by now, Japan does not maintain diplomatic relations WJ :h South Africa, but has limited its relations with that country to the consular level. In an effort to limit contacts between the peoples of the two countries, Japan has imposed restrictions on sports, cultural and educational exchangesJ it has suspended the issue of tourist visas to South African nationals, and has urge the Japanese people to refrain from touring South Africa. Japan refuses to engage in military or nuclear co-operation of any kind with South Africa. In the field of economic and~trade relations, Japan banned all direct investment in South Africa as early as the mid-1960s. It has restricted commerci 1 loans and urged all those concerned to halt the import of Krugerrands and other gold coins. Its trade restrictions vis-a-vis South Africa also include a prohibition on iron and steel imports, on arms exports, and on the export of computers to South African institutions that enforce apartheid. It has suspended .,ir, links with that country, and prohibits its government officials from using iinternational flights of South African Airways. Moreover, recognizing the need for concerted action, the Government of Japan has appealed to the Japanese business community to ensure that their commercial activities will not in any way undermine or weaken the effectiveness of sanctions or similar punitive measures taken by other countries. The Japanese business community has indeed heeded this appeal. I should like to respond at this time to the concern expressed by a previous speaker as to whether Japan is expanding its trade with South Africa. When measured in United States dollars, Japan's trade with South Africa certainly registered an increase in 1986. This increase, however, is due to the appreciation of the Japanese yen in relation to the United States dollar. In fact, when measured in Japanese yen, it decreased by 12 per cent between 1985 and 1986, registering its lowest level since 1980. Clearly, then, Japan's trade with South Africa is decreasing in volume by more or less the same percentage as above. The international community must relentlessly exert political and economic pressure on South Africa until it recognizes that apartheid is totally inadmissible and that it must be eradicated. Japan, for its part, is exploring all possible avenues towards this end. First of all, it is seeking to promote political dialogue with regional leaders, inclUding the black leaders in South Africa. Last year, my Government welcomed the late President Samora Machel of Mozambique and also a delegation of the Foreign Ministers of non-aligned States for in-depth exchanges of views. Mr. Oliver Tambo, President of the ANC, also visited my country in April this year for intensive discussions with Japanese leaders. Secondly, Japan is extending educational and training assistance to help prepare young black citizens of South Africa and Namibia for the day when they wi: assume positions of leadership in their respective countries. Japan increased Sue assistance by extending an additional sum of $4UU,000 this fiscal year, to be usec for medical, educational and housing projects for South Africa's victims of apartheid. Thirdly, Japan is stepping up its efforts to assist the neighbouring African States, which are suffering economic difficulties owing to the deteriorating situation inside South Africa, as well as to Pretoria's harassment. In January of this year, my Government dispatched a high-level economic co-operation mission to the front-line States and, at the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference (SADCC), held in Gaborone, Japan's representative confirmed its intention to assist the countries in that region as they strive to overcome their present difficulties and strengthen their economic resilience. When will the white minority rulers in Pretoria realize that peace will not b restored to their troubled land unless and until they abolish their repugnant policies of apartheid and realize that the course of aggression and repression wil only lead to further bloodshed and, ultimately, to outright civil war? When will South Africa come to its political senses and realize that the days of apartheid are numbered? As history has demonstrated throughout the ages, ~reedom and human dignity cannot be suppressed indefinitely. Justice will ultimately prevail. Mr. KABANDA (Rwanda) (interpretation from French): Fir st of all, permit me here to refer to President Kountche of the Republic of the Niger, who left this world ten days or so ago. I request the sister delegation of that country to convey to the people of the Niger the condolences and sympathy of my delegation. It has been said that the days pass by, but that they are different. Indeed, every day brings with it its share of happiness or unhappiness, its share of joy and suffering. But in South Africa, however, the days go by, but the similarity of the days is so strange. They have a great deal in common~ they are all grim for the major ity of the population of that country. Only yesterday it was arrests and rigged summary tr ials. 'Ibday it is executions. Tomorrow there will be more police raids on the quarters reserved for blacks. Here we see mothers weeping over the death of their children, there we see sobbing children who have lost their parents and all hope of future comfort. There is the despair of wioows, whose husbands have fallen under the deadly gunfire of a repress ive police force or in the gaols of the apartheid regime. In that country, every day adds to the grim toll of deaths, people multilated and wounded, and those exiled for failing to obey unjust laws or refusing to allCl\\' themselves to be arbitrarily herded into bleak and inhospitable zones. How much longer can this go on? The answer is simple~ as long as apartheid lasts~ as long as the defenders of the regime believe that it is in their interest to keep more than 20 million blacks in slavery; as long as the minority in power believes that it can bully and trample with impugnity on the aspirations of millions of men and women, their most natural aspirations to equality, freedom, lod a fa ir share of the resources of the country. We refuse to believe that apartheid can be reformed, for to reform is to improve. Evil cannot be improved. Apartheid is an absolute evil and must be eliminated. It is a philosophy of oppression founded on aberrant principles. } 1 the constitutional apparatus, the political, economic and social apparatus, is built on racial inequality, That philosophy must be replaced with another, more human philosophy, based on values accepted by the human community - an egalitari t\ philosophy which would bring about the self-fulfilment of the human person, whic Would promote the creation of a just, free society where the conditions for development and prosperity are equal for alL That is what is being demanded at the very cost of their lives by the thousands of men and women who every day go inta the streets of Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth, Crossroad, indeed of Sharpevill and Soweta, to wrest from the stubborn and repressive grasp of this regime, by their sheer numbers and their courage, the dignity due to man and the liberty whi h properly belongs to every citizen. We hail the courage of those Afrikaner businessmen - I believe there were 6] - who took the risk, because there was indeed a risk in getting on the wrong side 0 the apar theid regime, of meeting in Dakar their coJ'1ilatriots of the Afr ican Nation 1 Congress (ANC). Permit me here to pay a tribute to the Goyernment of Senegal, which offered to be host to those pilgrims for harmony in South Africa. That historic dialogue has only confirmed our conviction that dialogue will make it possible to bring about a settlement of the problem of South Africa without bloodshed, but, if the condi tions for negotiations continue to be rejected by tho: in power in pretoria, the only thing left will be to attempt to seize those right: by other means. Need I repeat here and now the condi tions for a peaceful soll101'on in Sou th Africa? Yes, I shall recall them, because we must insist upon them until the leaders of Pretoria come to understand that it is in the interests of the country, of all the citizens of South Africa, to proceed in that way. The first condition is the liberation of political prisoners., Nelson Mandela, Zephania MJtopeng and all those impr isoned for their opposition to the policy of apartheid. Certainly the freeing last week of ('7OITan Mbeki was a positive gesture, provided it is not the, last. Another oondition is the lifting of the ban on political parties, particularly the African National Congress, and the ending of the state of emergency which, imposed in June 1986, has become virtually permanent since it was renewed th is year. Ano ther condi tion is negotia tions wi th black leaders to define a constitutional basis for establishing a multiracial, egalitarian society, along with universal and free elections on the basis of the principle of one man one vote. Ther e must also be an end to the destabilization operations aga inst neighbouring countries in the region. to bring about a solution. What is needed is not an antechambre to the South African Parliament but access to the Parliament itself for those who so wish and are able to do so, thanks to free democratic procedures. That is to say, the same criteria must be applied to all, first and foremost of course, equality for all SOuth African citizens before the law, which obviously cannot be the laws of apar theid now imposed on the majori ty of the popula tion aga inst its will. We refuse to take at face value what some would have us believe, because contrary to what they assert, events in south Africa are not moving towards a peaceful solution. Indeed, in spite of so-called reforms and the travesty of elections held in May 1987, the regime is hardening from day to day. So-called constitutional reforms are nothing but illusions. We refuse to believe that consul tative chamers and presidential councils are the right answer to the consti tu tion al problem of South Afr ica. All these expedients have been concocted in order for the regime to gain time. But the days of the guilty are nunt>ered, and if they are not careful the few days that remain could well be tragic. In spite of its apparatus of repression and methods of intimidation, the police of the regime 'ill not be able to contain the anger of a people pushed to breaking point, at the very end of their tether. Those who refuse to exert pressure on the aEartheid regime should under stand tha t the ir long -term in ter es ts do not lie in the direct or ind irect support they provide. They have to understand that their investments cannot prosper in a country without freedom, that a state of permanent confrontation has never anywhere been good for business, even if there are some people who fish in troubled waters who might gain some momentary benefit. with regard to apartheid, the passivity of those who might have an influence on the atti tUde of the people in power in that The opponents of sanctions against South Africa tell us with conviction that blacks or front-line States would be the fir st to suffer from the effects of these sanctions. Never theless, they do not hesi ta te to have recourse to this w'eapon when thl!:,irown interests are concerned. But even if this were to happen, it would 'be far pre ferable to suffer for a short time than to endure the endless si tuationin which the blacks in South Africa ar,e living today, as are the people of Namibia and the front-line States. Imagine for a moment someone saying to the south African:" blacks~ "Give up your freedom, work for me, remain in subjugation. In return, I guar an tee you food, hous ing and protection" - in a word, a re turn to slavery. Liberty cannot be subject to this kind of bargaining, or bartered for bread. Imagine sQmeone saying to the front-line States: "If you want to live in security in your own country, give up your support for those who are trying to free themselves from apartheid, from colonization by South Africa. !et me impose my will upon you. Do what you are told and do not maintain any relations that do not suit us." I am sure members will agree that this kind of bargaining is unacceptable. No people and no country in southern Afr ica - anywhere in Afr iea or the world for that matter - can afford such a price. Yet that is what is being asked of the SOuth Afr iean black popUlation and the Namibian population, because it is said that they would be the first to be affected by binding sanctions - sanctions which could hasten the end of their sufferings. That is what is being demanded of Botswana, Mozambique, zambia, Swaziland and Zimbabwe, although the South African army carries out frequent raids in their terr i tory aga inst civ il ian targets, inclUding refugee camps, in order to discourage those countr ies from continuing their efforts to liberate the black man in South Africa and to br ing independence to Namibia. But what about the People 's Republic of Angola, the southern part of which is under the occupation by Pretoria's army. Fight.ing is raging there today, and everyone knows it, since the South African Q:)vernment itself shamelessly admits it. Who would not be indignant at the fact that South African President Botha himself a week or so ago went to the sou thoE Angola, the theatre of war against that country, to give advice to his invasion troops and his proteges. What scorn, what arrogance before all mankind. I should like to issue a warnin9 to those who refuse to take the necessary 'l eCalomic measures, because a criminal like South Africa which goes unpunished may· , •. encourage others to act with the same impunity, and when we get to that point we may well wonder what is the use of the ideals of justice, peace and freedom, which we are so fond of proclaiming here. It is high time for each of us here to question o.urselves seriously about our own a.t~ituPe regarding the oppressive regime of the South African Government and to see that it follows a new course dicta ted by these considerations. I would conclude my statement by conveying my warm congratulations to the Special Committee against Apartheid for the quality of information in its report. I \«>ul,d request that Conunittee not to allow itself to be discouraged by the diffi9ulty of the task. Perhaps the future of the South African black people- depends in some measure on the perseverance of that Committee•. Mr. PELAEZ (Philippines): Article I of the universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims) "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed wi th reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spir it of brotherhood. 11 In South Africa, black people are not born to freedom. Blacks are denied their basic human rights and dignity because of the colour of their skin. This is the Government policy of apartheid institutionalized by the regime in Pretoria. The Declara tion fur ther sta tes that: it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a 11 last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and repression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law." (third preambular paragraph) In South Africa, only the human rights of the whites are protected by the law. Thus, we are witness to the rebellion of the blacks against the tyrants who institutionalized the policy of apartheid. In our time, the Un iver sal Declar ation of Human Rights is the foundation of all human rights instruments. It eITbodies the highest ideals of man in his life on Ear th. I star ted my s ta temen t by ci ting the Declar ation, becaus e I see the need for us to assess how much we, the Sta tes MeiOOers of the united Nations, have accomplished - or failed to accomplish - to achieve our primary objective of protecting and pronnting human rights of all people wi thout distinction as to raCE colour, sex, language, religion or origin. If the adoption of the numerous international human rights instruments were the gauge, then the united Nations has done Illlch. But, as long as apartheid exist in South Afr ica and is extended in Namibia, we cannot say that we have succeeded i our mission. Apartheid makes a :rrockery of the uni ted Na tions Charter and all ita lofty objectives. That apartheid still exists in this day and age is a sad commentary on the effectiveness of the United Nations as a guardian of human dignity. Fbr four decades now, almost throughout its entire life, the United Nations has been confronted with the problem of apartheid. No other issue has evoked so much passion among the Member States. Witness the hundreds of resolutions, decisions, declarations and statements calling for the immediate abolition of apar theid and the innumer able conferences, missions and debates under taken in all parts of the world, all in pursuit of this cause. However, reason and sanity have not prevailed. South Africa has refused to heed the outcry of the in terna tional community, even as many Merrber Sta tes have terminated diplomatic, economic and cultural relations with its Government. The United Nations has declared that the continued existence of apartheid is ( 1rowing threat to international peace and security. Under Chapter VIr of the Jnited Nations Charter, the General Assembly has called for the imposition of comprehensive and mandatory sanctions against SOuth Africa. But all of these have been to no ava i1. * Unfor tuna tely, the Security Council has failed to do what the General Assenbly has done. It is, indeed, ironic that some Member States, which were forefront advocates during the drafting of the Charter of the United Nations and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, have not seen fit to assume their responsibility under the Charter to put an end to the flagrant violation of human rights and fundamental freeOOms in south Afr ica. It would seem, sadly, that economic interests and expediency have outweighed humanity and justice. The apartheid regime continues to shake its oppressive fist, as Member States, wose political and economic power could influence South Africa, remain passive to the idea of mandatory sanctions. We are all agreed that apartheid cannot be reformed. It must be abolished. So then, why can we not all agree that the only peaceful means to eradicate the system is to isolate the Pretoria regime through the imposition of comprehensive and manda tory sanctions? Why do we allow the south Afr ican Government to defy the collective will of 159 Gover nmen ts ? Much time, more than sufficient time in fact, has been given to dialogue, talks and all manner of persuasion. They have all failed to yield results, unless CXlsmetic changes could be called results. Eminent and leading statesmen have added their voices to the call for comprehensive and mandatory sanctions. Even the Reverend Leon Sullivan, author of the Sullivan Principles, which contains a code of conduct for United States businesses in South Africa, has announced that the principles had failed to attain their goal. He, too, is now calling for comprehensive trade sanctions against South Africa. (Mr. Pelaez, Phil ippines) It is true that there have been some encouraging signs. A number of develop~ countries have adopted measures limiting their economic activities in South Afric. , and some multinational companies have started to leave the territory. But, while these developments are welcome, they are insufficient, unco-ordinated and slow in coming. They cannot substitute for concerted, comprehensive and mandatory sanctions, which are imperatively needed to achieve tt dismantling of apartheid. As the Special Committee against Apartheid has said: " .•• selective and unco-ordinated sanctions give the regime the oppor tunity t ' absorb, to a certain degree, the cost involved and to design defensive action. 11 (A/42/22, par a. 148) Those who object to manda tory sanctions argue that such actions will hurt thE victims of apartheid rather than its practitioners. The majority of nations have repeatedly rejected this argument as the voice of a false humanitarianism which places exped iency above human dignity and human rights. Let the truth be heard loud and clear. The oppressed black people of South Africa themselves have expressed readiness to absorb the additional pa in of sanctions if this will mean the final end of the system which has brought them unspeakable suffer ing and misery. The situation in South Africa and Namibia continues to deteriorate. The reports of the Special Committee and of the United Nations Council for Namibia bear witness to this deterioration. The Pretoria regime speaks of reforms. But we know only too well that Mr. Botha's reforms are superficial, far from real, and mere acts of appeasement. For apartheid continues to hold the black people of South Africa and Namibia in a bloody colonial grip. Mr. Botha himsel f has arrogantly declared on many occasions that ther e will never be black major ity rule or a black Head of State in South Africa. Indeed, his so-called reforms are meaningless and insult the sensibilities of those who seek justice in a civilized world. Recently, Govan Mbeki, a political prisoner for 24 years, and four others were released by the Pretoria regime. While this can be a source of hope for many in South Africa, we should continue to demand that Nelson Mandela, zephania M':lthopeng and all other political pr isoners be released, that the state of emergency be lifted, and that the ban on resistance groups be rescinded forthwith. As a founding member of the Special Commi ttee aga inst Apartheid, the Philippines has stood firmly with the international community in its opposition to apartheid. It maintains no relations with Pretoria, supports all initiatives against South Africa's policy and imposes sanctions against that country. The Philippines has ratified the two anti-apartheid instruments, namely, the International Convention on the suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid and the International Convention .Against Apartheid in Sports. As a gesture of its support for the anti-apartheid cause and for the front-line states, the Philippines has made modest contributions to such Funds as the Uni ted Na tions Tr ust Fund for Sou th AfIi ca, the uni ted Na tions Tr us t Fund for Publicity Against }£artheid and the United Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa. It has also contributed to the AFRICA Fund established by the Sumnit Meeting of the Non-Aligned M:>vement in Harare last year. Last July the Chairman of the Special Commi ttee aga inst Apartheid, Major General Joseph N. Garba, visited the Philippines as an official guest of thE Government. On that occasion President Corazon C. Aquino received the Chairman an reaffirmed the unwavering and continued support of the Philippines for the black South African struggle for justice, freedom and equality, under the leadership of the Afr ican Na tional Congress (ANC) and the Pan Afr icanist Congress of Azan ia (PAC), the sole, authentic representatives of the black South Africans. The Philippines shares the universal hope for a peaceful change in South Africa, for an end to oppression, violence, hate and torment in that troubled land. The black people of South Afr ica deserve to live in dignity and peace. The have been denied this all their lives. The strands of human patience and endurance are reaching the breaking point. Yet we must persevere. We must continue·to apply to South Africa the moral force )f a world united against apartheid until it comes to realize that it cannot go on defying the conscience of mank ind. For Sou th Africa to do so would be to invite disaster and des tr uction. I should like to conclude by quoting from a most perceptive student of South African affairs, the British author, Clem Sunter, who underlines the sine qua non to that country's future~ "The most critical part of the vision of a prosperous and stable South AfJ;' iea is to put all South Afr icans first, plain and simple. 'Being SOuth . .Afriean1 entails looking beyond the categories of colour and groups and realizing that individuals are far more complex phenomena with a myriad of associations other than those two. The individual is the basic building..,block of mankind; each of us would not possess free will if it were otherwise. The best analogy as to why South Africans should put each other first is that of a sinking ship with the officers arguing on the bridge. If they go on arguing till the salt water covers their mouths, they all drown. It is in everyone ~s interest to man the pumps and stop the ship sinking. 11 Mr. YUSOF (Malaysia): After almost four decades it is very difficult for my delegation to accept the fact that the United Nations is still unable to put an end to apartheid in South Africa. The failure to terminate this evil and inhuman policy, which the United Nations has declared as a crime against humanity should weigh heavily on the conscience of all nations represented here. Malaysia is gravely concerned about the unprecedented levels of State-sponsored violence practised by Pretoria in its effort to perpetuate apartheid. The racist regime is clearly determined to preserve white supremacy at all cost. 'lb the majority, the so-called election in May 1987, demonstrates the racist regime's success in creating a siege mentality in the white minority. It now believes that it has the endorsement to escalate the repression of the black major ity. My delega tion extends its warm appr ecia tion to the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid for the Special Committee IS informative and comprehensive report. It provides a litany of the horrors carried out in the name of apartheid. Outrage and revulsion assail the reader. We are also most appreciative of the Secretary-Genera1's repor t and that of the Special. Po1 itical committee. The political situation in South Africa has regressed. The state of emergency, Pretoria's camouflage for State-sponsored terrorism, has been extended An all-out attempt is being made to crush the opposition, with the police, army al vigilante groups given licence to terrorize the black population. Pretoria is doing its best to institutionalize and rationalize its administrative andpoliticc control over its helpless population. The national security management system plays a leey role in this sinister exercise. Pretoria's attempts to reassert and consolidate white domination do not succ~ed in masking its fears of losing control in the explosive situation it has created. The so-called election did not reflect the reality of growing dissent within the bastion of Afrikanerdom and the broader white community. Most important, the resistance of the courageous h1ack majority has stood up to ~Fetoria's worst blows. We are especially encouraged by the role of the trade union movement in this respect. The human tragedy in south Africa continues unabated. There are the massive numbers of arrests. Figures released by the Detainees' Parents support Committee tell us 40 per cent of the 30,000 people detained since June 1986 are children under 18 years of age. Pretoria has now identified black children as a target for violent repression, inclUding murder and torture. The unrestrained and unchecked brutality of the army and police is compounded by the new frightening element of the use of murderous vigilante groups. We are aware that more than 2,300 people, mostly black, have been killed since september 1984. Activists from the United Democratic Front, the Congress of South African Trade Unions and the Azanian People's Organization are being increasingly singled out for political assaSB inat ion. In its strategy to perpetuate apartheid, Pretoria has also sought regional domination. The campaign to destabi1ize neighbouring States has been vigorously escalated. The reasons for this campaign are clearly stated in the Special Committee's report as follows: "to weaken their economies and thus keep them dependent on South Africa, to use them as hostages to alleviate outside pressures, to dissuade them from supporting opponents of the regime and indeed physically to eliminate such opponents". (A/42/22, para. 47) Acts of aggression are conducted against Angola. The occupied territory of Namibia has been used as a launching pad against that country. Mozambique has bee'i1 a pr ime target. Hundreds of thousands of people have lost their lives, even more have been displaced, and the Mozambique economy is seriously jeopardized. Botswana has also been the object of violent and unprovoked attacks. Death sauads have operated in Zambia and Zimbabwe. We are shocked to read in the Special Committee's report that, in the five years from 1980 to 1984, South Africa's efforts at aggression and destahilization have cost the nine countries of the South African Development Co-ordination Conference more than $10 billion and that by the end of 1986 the figure rose to over $18 billion. The apartheid-inspired actions of the Pretoria regime have become part of the historical lexicon of the major crimes against humanity. We resolutely condemn them. We share the agonies of its victims. We reaffirm our solidarity with the heroic resistance. We also identify ourselves with the concerns of the front-line States and endorse their call for action to the international community as expressed in their Maputo Declaration of 12 October. The luxury of time has long been exhausted in South Africa. There has been too much sUffering and injustice for the international community not to act, and act decisively. The monstrous policies of the racist regime in Pretoria must be firmly rebuffed. It is with strong feelings, therefore, that we support the comprehensive recommendations of the Special Committee against Apartheid, but we are convinced that there is only one effective answer: concerted, comprehensive and mandatory sanctions against racist South Africa as advocated by the World Conference on Sanctions against Racist South Africa held in Paris last year. We should like to congratulate Major General Joseph Garba of Nigeria, the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid, for his inspired leadership of the Conference. South Africa must be totally isolated for apartheid to be destroyed. T~e piecemeal measures currently undertaken have been too easily circumvented by South Africa. Only comprehensive mandatory sanctions ~ill make Pretoria fully comprehend the rejection of its policies by the international community. Only such a course can end the human toll and br ing hope to the black major i ty thatits dream of a united and democratic South Africa can be realized. Malaysia, therefore, finds it extremely regrettable that some powerful nations which have special relationships of race or economy with the Pretoria regime continue to obs truct the application of comprehens ive mandatory sanctions in the Security Council. Their protestations concerning strategic concerns, rather than the objective realities of the human suffering in South Africa, are hollow. Their claim that such sanctions cannot be effective and would hur t the black South Africans is false. The fact is that South African black leaders have themselves called for sanctions. They understand that there is no other option. They accept that this price must be paid. The hypocrisy and patronizing attitudes of a small number of countries that oppose comprehensive mandatory economic sanctions are most obnoxious. If they are genuine in their cancer n for the repercussions of sanctions on the black s, they have only to extend political support and economic assistance to the victims of apartheid in south Africa and to the front-line states. We are indeed grateful to the many countries, the United Nations, other international organizations and non-governmental organizations ~hich have generously given invaluable assistance. The summit meeting of non-aligned countries in Har are last year decided, in its wisdom, to establish the Action for Resisting Invasion, Colonization and Apartheid Fund (AFRICA Fund) for southern Africa. Malaysia has contributed $2 million in k lnd to the Fund. We hope all Member Sta tes will suppor t the AFR leA Fund to the best of their abilities. There is a pressing need for more assistance to be forthcoming for both the black South Africans and the countries of the South African Development Co-ordination Conference. The role of the united Nations is crucial in stimulating and co-ordinating the flow of assistance. This world body should also prepare comprehensive recommendations on how the effects of sanctions on the black population can be alleviated. My delegation would like to note here our satisfaction with the results of the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Vancouver in October 1987, in particular with the Ok~nagan statement and programme of action for southern Africa. Considering the inherent constraints on the Commonwealth, and especially the views of one member State, substantial progress was made in arriving at that plan of action. We also salute the work of the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group, which has identified the basis of a negotiating process between Pretoria and the true representatives of the black majority. Regrettably, Pretoria has rejected the negotiating concept submitted by the Group, thus once again manifesting its obstinate arrogance and indifference towards the Commonwealth and the international community. Malaysia's commitment to the struggle against apartheid has been unequivocal. We are prOUd that we have no links of any kind with racist south Africa. Malaysian law .~xpressly forbids any dealings with that country as long as apartheid exists. We are prepared to take these steps for the achievement of human dignity in South Africa. The Malaysian Government and people are united in their determination to contribute to this noble cause - determination we are convinced is matched among all memhers of the international community - in striving for the speedy elimination of apartheid and the achievement of black majority rule in South Africa. We appeal to those Member States that obstruct the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions to take heed of the views of the overwhelming majority of peoples everywhere. The hopes of millions of people in southern Africa for peace and freedom are at stake. We, the Member states of the United Nations, cannot an~ must not let them remain hostages to racism, greed and power rivalries. (Mr. Yusof, Malaysia) Mr. TADESSE (Eth iopia); That apattheid is an abhor rent and condemnable policy, denying basic human rights and fundamental freedoms to millions in SOU th Africa, is today universally accepted. That the same policy is the root cause of the human suffering and des truction resul ting from the illegal occupa tion of Namibia and the acts of aggression against, and destabilization of, the front-line States, is also widely acknowledged. But that such an evil policy and such a criminal system should be allowed to survive in a world in which the holocaust of Naz ism and Fascism is still ftesh in the memory is beyond comprehension. When the history of the second half of the twentieth century is written, apartheid will surely stand out as a prominent indictment of the generations that lived through that per iod. The heroism, fortitude and selflessness of the oppressed masses of South Africa, the sacrifice of the peoples of the front-line States and the courageous struggle of the Namibian people will, on the other hand, form bright and fulfill ing chapters of the history of that same period. There is still more than a decade left before the turn of the century. It is not yet too late for the present generation to adopt measures which could very well alter the way in which the history of this period is written. If we close ranks and wage a determined fight against apartheid the focus of history may shift from the survival of apartheid to the perseverance and the determination of the struggle against it. Indeed, the final chapters of the twentieth century may be the history of the v ictory of the str uggle aga iost apartheid. That struggle against apartheid must be waged and strengthened on two fronts. The popular resistance of the subjuga ted wi thin South Afr ica must be intensified. Recent events show that that is happening. They equally show that the repression of the racist regime is also escalating. People whose only crime is to cry for freedom are slain by the score each day. Thousands are arrested and detained and ~an9uish in the regime's prisons for years on end. The nunber of those who are tortured and those who subsequently die is astounding. The racist and repressive legislation, such as the Population Registration Act, the Group Areas Act, the state of emergency and the policy of Bantustanization are all intact and in effect, the so-called reforms notwi thstanding. The release of Mr. G:>van Mbeki, while in itself a welcome developnent, will have no salutary effect on the overall situation unless it is followed by the release of Nelson Mandela and all the other political pr isaner s on Robben Island, in Pollsmoor and elsewhere. Indeed, without the lifting of the ban on the .African National Congress and other political groups, without the repeal of all racist 1aws, and wi thout the opening of direct negotiations between the regime and the 1egitimate representatives of the oppressed, the half-hearted and sporadic measures taken by Pretoria can neither alter the situation nor satisfy the aspirati.ons of the people of that unhappy land for equality and freedom. As a result, the resistance of the oppressed must continue, however long and arduous the road to victory may be. Pretoria's lawlessness has become so naked that very recently Botha, at the head of his apartheid army and a column of mercenary bandits, further undermined the territorial integrity of Angola, in utter disregard of all existing norms of international law. This, indeed, constitutes further proof of South Africa's continued disrespect for the will of the international conununity. It is not only Angola tha t has become the victim of such an outrage, but also the in terna tional community at large. For us in Africa it is an aggression against the sovereignty of our own nations. It shows that nothing could be more criminally dangerous than the arrogant apartheid (IIentality. The situation within South Africa and this intensified threat and subversion directed against the front-line States require a prompt response from all concerned for peace and human dignity. (Mr. Tadesse, Ethiopia) Resistance to apartheid within South Africa is increasingly driving the racist·· regime to desperation. But the struggle against apartheid also needs concerted action by the world community. Thus at the international level, too, the diplomatic struggle must be continued with added vigour. What has already been accomplished in this regard cannot be underestimated. But it is what is yet to be' achieved that will be the decisive factor in the diplomatic struggle. The final culmination of our efforts must be the total isolation of the racist regime. Those who feel that by maintaining contacts with Pretoria they can influence the regime are, at best, deluding themselves and, at worst, pander inq to the interests of those who are profi ting from the den ial of human rights and fundamental freedoms to the overwhelming majority of the SOuth African people. We are convinced that the only peaceful path for the elimination of apartheid is the imp06ition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions against south Africa under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. While the trend towards the recognition of this fact and the adoption of measures severing links with Pretoria is quite encour aging I we cannot but be concerned at the continuing collaboration between South Africa and some major Powers in the West. We hope, perhaps hoping against hope, that those major Power s will soon join the rest of the international community in not simply condemning apartheid, but in ensuring strict compliance with sanctions already in place and, more important, in imposing compreh~nsive mandatory sanctions. If sanctions are to be valid policy instruments in relation to countries in the third world and in the socialist bloc, it will be impossible to convince anyone of their ineffectiveness when applied to racist South Africa. Indeed, to argue so would only be a self-serving and hypocritical stratagem. Falling short of comprehensive mandatory sanctions will surely stoke the fire of the armed struggle, leading to further bloodshed and indeed to a regional cOr;1flagra tion. 'l'hose who shudder at the thought of such an eventuality must supor t sanctions now. Arguing against the option of the armed struggle, or questioning its legitimacy while organizing, financing and arming bandits in other parts of the world is, to say the least, duplicity based on an insane policy. It will get us nowhere, except to prolong the suffer ing and agony of the South African people. Inste~d, we must together isolate the racist regime and at the same time extend mora~ and material support to the African National Congress and other patriotic forces in SOuth Afr ica. Fur ther, we must assist in every way possible the front-line States, whose peoples are sharing the burden of the struggle. For our part, the people and the Q)vernment of the People's Democratic RepUblic of Ethiopia, true to their commitment to the total liberation of Africa, will continue their suppor t for the total emancipa tion of the South African people as well as for the independence of Namibia and the peace and progress of the coun tries of sou ther n Afr ica. Finally, I conunend the Special Comrni ttee aga mst Apartheid and its Chairman for their indefatigable efforts in mobilizing international action against apartheid. We wholeheartedly support the Special COllUllittee's ooncluaions and recommendations and hope for their unanimous adoption by the General Assenbly. considering the question of apartheid and the policy of racial discrimination now running rampant in south Mrica. The oppression and exploitation of the South African people and the denial of their most basic rights grows worse every day. Forcible upheaval, arbitrary arrest and judicial iniquity continue to be the daily lot of the overwhelming majority of South Africans. Thousands of South African blacks have been compelled to settle in the homelands, stripped of South African citizenship and turned into strangers within their own country. All opposition to this policy is strictly forbidden and the forces of repression, which enjoy unlimited powers, act with total impunity. Trade unionists, youths, women, students and children are equally liable to this repression. The plight of children is particularly disturbing. They have become a pr ime target for the secur ity forces, which were surpr ised by their increasingly energetic resistance to the genocide being practised against their people. The minority regime is likewise continuing with its measures to attack and destabilize the front-line States. Its armed forces and auxiliaries have turned the whole of southern Africa into a war zone in which they SCM death and 3es truction. These inhuman practices are rooted in the apartheid system, which is founded on racism and racial discrimination. Apartheid, we cannot repeat often enough, is :l crime against mankind and its persistence represents a challenge to our 'lrganization and to international law. All those who believe "in the dignity and orth of the human person" proclaimed in the United Nations Charter are duty-bound o oppose it. The peoples of South Africa and of Namibia under the leadership of the African National Congress of South Afr ica (ANC) and of the South west Afr ica People's Organization (SWAOO), and the front-line States, have already made great sacrifices in their heroic struggle against the system. In South Afr ica itself the policy of repression simply imparts fresh vigour to their struggle. A powerful mass movement has grown up within the country. My country wishes to hail this struggle and to place on record its support for the struggle being waged. We appeal to the international oolll1lunity to support the struggle and to impose comprehensive, mandatory, effective economic sanctions upon the apartheid regime to compel it to lift the state of emergency, to release political detainees - par ticularly Nelson Mandela - to end the ban on denocra tic forces and to negotia te with the authentic representatives of the South Afr ican people to bring about a delOOcratic and egalitarian regime. Such sanctions have been called for repeatedly by the peoples of South Africa and Namibia and by the front-line states. Within this context we would commend the steps already taken by a number of countries and in ter national and non-governmental organizations and urge them to stand by the courageous posi tions they have taken. In view of the intransigence and arrogance of the Pretoria regime, which continues to flout the various resolutions of the United Nations and the demands of the international conununity, the Security Council must meet its very special responsibilities and apply the measures prQllided for in Chapter VII of the United Na tions Charter to speed up the dismantling of the apartheid system. At all events, the SUffering inflicted upon the peoples of southern Africa will not stop their heroic struggle, which will inevitably lead to the end of apartheid. My country's delegation cannot conclude without paying tribute to the special Committee against ~artheid for the exemplary way it is performing its task. Its watchful response to developments in South Africa, its monitoring of the implementation of United Nations resolutions and the work it does to rouse world public opinion to the existence of th is scourge deserve the admiration of all peace- and justice-loving countr ies. In particular, we would commend the tireless efforts made by the Committee I s Chairman, Ambassador Joseph Garba, Permanent Representative of the sister republic of Niger ia. Thanks to the work of the Special Committee and the tireless activities of its Chairman, the echoes of the struggle of the South Afr ican people are today ringing around the entire wor Id despi te the str ingent censor ship imposed by the racist minority regime upon any coverage of the heroic deeds of the SOuth African people. This year again our Assembly has before it a number of draft resolutions which reflect the constant concern of the international community at the continuing and worsening situation in South Africa. The unanimous adoption of those draft resolutions would represent a substantial contribution and vigorous encouragement to all forces s truggl ing to br lng about an end to the loa thsome apar theid sys tern nd the establishment of a democratic, non-racial regime. In accordance with ita traditional policy of solidarity and support for the struggle of the South African people, Mauritania will continue its support for all measures that can contribute to the total and rapid eradication of apartheid, that scourge and crime against humanity. Mr. mtMBA (tJ;Janda): First I would express my appreciation to Ambassador Joseph Garba, Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid, and his o:>lleagues for the unflinching efforts they have exerted to eradicate apartheid from the face of the earth and for the excellent reports they have provided to the General Assembly. These reports provide ample examples of the callous and casual cruelties being perpetrated by the Pretoria regime. The spirit of the age we live in is one of emancipation of peoples and coun tr ies and of affirmation of fundamental human rights and freedoms. South Africa has continued to defy and challenge the spirit of the age by ruthlessly and oppressively trampling on the rights of its peoples in pursuit of the evil policy of apartheid. Since the dawn of civilization, mankind has come a long way. We have seen the rise and fall of mighty empires once considered invincible. In every endeavour of human activity new horizons are being achieved which usher in a new era. History is reple te with examples of the misguided who defy the process of change and try to reverse the course of history. Such obstructionists have always been left on the dust-heap of history. That apartheid should still exist at the dawn of the twenty-first century and of the space age is an affront and a challenge by those who practise it to the international community as a whole. About four decades ago, in the face of a Fascist Nazi dictatorship which espoused and practised theories of racial superiority and aggression, the world united to take up arms against a sea of troubles and, by opposing them, end them. It was in the aftermath of that era that the Uni ted Nations was born wi th the ob jectives: n'lb save succeeding generations from the scourge of war ••• to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and to establish conditions under which justice ••• can be maintained ••• and for these ends to practise tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security n ... . The resolve of all of us, of each country represented here, to espouse the objectives of this Organization as spelled out in the Charter, especially as they relate to human rights, will never be more severely tested than. in the case of southern Africa. This year the world has approvingly witnessed many Nazi criminal operators, such as Barbie, being detected, apprehended, indicted and punished for the genocide they perpetrated under Nazi Germany. Our memory of the holocaust and the despicable Herrenvo1k theory has been jolted and revived. It has been extensively argued that the world should be constantly reminded of the holocaust to prevent adventurers from repeating it. My delegation agrees with that view. But this should also provide all of us 'loll th a sharp reminder of the monstrosity of the existence in our midst, in this century, of a regime that not only espouses but also brutally puts into practice the policy of apartheid. It is perhaps necessary to remind everyone that apartheid is a unique moral evil and a crim~ ill the contemporary world. It has long been condemned by this Assenbly as,a crime against humanity. Apartheid is not merely a denial of certain human rights~ it is both in theory and practice a political and social system of institutionalized racism, which maintains white domination while systematically oppressing c;md treating the majority blacks, Coloured and Indian populations as slaves. in their own country. Apartheid is the modern version of nazism. We are therefore amazed that those who show zeal in the hunting and punishment of Nazi cr iminals do not show equal zeal in their opposition to the Nazi-like regime of south Africa. It is a shame that in this rrodern era the racist regime is not only tolerated but is courted by some as an ally and protector of western values and interests in the region. The experience of the policy of appeasement with Nazi Germany should warn all concerned that such a policy is doomed to failure. In order to perpetuate the minority regime and its odious policy of apartheid, the Pretor ia regime is waging a total war both with its own people in southern Africa and in the front-l ine Sta tes. Pretor ia has never learnt the lesson tha t wherever there is oppression there is bound to be resistance. They are under a false illusion that by putting Nelson Mandela and others, including small children, into prison, they will bring the conbatants to their knees. On the contrary, their examples are a great inspiration to people to fight and die rather than suffer enSlavement. The internal resistance has become stronger, more widespread and more daring. Consequently, the racist regime has had to deploy the army and the police in the black townships since the people have made them ungovernable. The grip of the regime on the coun try has become more precarious as the struggle has gained in strength and become a people's war. More ominously for the regime and their collaborators, the struggle is increasingly gaining the support of the whites. Even the Dutch Reformed Church, which provided apartheid with religious underpinnings, has chosen to catch up with the twentieth century and has now declared apartheid to be a sinful ideology. It is clear that the struggle cannot be put down by any force whatever and that it will ultimately triumph. Our dui:yfs to hasten the day of reckoning. In a vain attempt to keep the world ignorant of what is happening, the racist regime has imposed a black-out on reports of its violence and atrocities. It ~s precisely the spectre of a whole community in protest, motivated by frustration and commitment, rather than a handful of agi tators, that the GOI1ernment hopes vainly to excise from public consciousness. In this way they hope to deceive the world, stem the isolation of South Africa, and check the efforts of the divestment and sanctions campaigns which have gained world-wide momentum. Pretoria has for long sought to achieve respectability by claiming that it was carrying out reforlt\S in the apartheid structure. To this end, it introduced the $ham consti tutional reforms whose clear object was to co-opt some sections of the oppressed majority and at the same time to divide it. The apologists of apartheid and the advoca tes of cons truct ive engagement applauded those mOl1es as pos i t ive developnents, but the people in South Afr ica saw them for what they were. They were resoundingly rejected by the Co1oureds and Indians, who had been the object of the so-called dispensation. Instead of learning from its folly Pretoria not only imposed more repressive measures but also went on to stage a farcical whites-only election in order to prove to the world that all South Africans were behind the' regime. Apartheid cannot be reformed) it must be dismantled. Until South Africa seriously embarks on dismantling the apartheid structure its rhetoric of racial reconciliation or imprOY'ing racial relations is nothing but deceptive talk. It is to us a matter of deep regret that some GoV'ernments in the West, out of misguided strategic and economic concerns, continue to bolster South Africa and undermine the campaign to isolate it. with regard to the question of apartheid and the problem ?'Partheid is the very antithesis of the ideals of the Charter and of our common humani ty. It is incunbent on all of us to br ing it to an end. In addition to the Pretoria regime's systematic oppression of the people of South Africa, it continues its illegal occupation of Namibia. As we have stated befo~,e, the plight of the Namibian people is an affront to our sense of justice and to the collective consciousness of the international community. We continue to witness the suffering of millions who are fighting for human dignity and justice as the Pretoria regime ruthlessly pursues its twin policies of apartheid and the colonial occupation of Namibia in defiance of the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the security Council. The policy of ruthless repression within South Africa has been coupled with the pursuit of a policy of aggression against the front-line States. This is being done either through direct intervention or through the actions of its surrogates whom it finances and arms wi th a v iew to des tab i1 iz ing the coun tr ies concerned. All the front-line States have been the victims of South Afr ica 's aggression. As we deliberate in this Assent>ly, South Africa continues to occupy southern Angola and has intervened to save its UNITA surrogates, who were on the verge of defeat. The racist Defence Minister had the temerity to boast of these heinous actions, as the Br itish newspaper, the Glardian, reported: "Where we are called on to protect African freedom against the tyranny of foreign oppression, we will respond". That was why, he said, South Africa had assisted UNITA against foreign-backed Angolan Government forces. He lauded Mr. Savimbi as: 11 the only hope for the people of Angola in a tragic landscape 0 f human suffer ing and oppression". affair s whereby the region is safe for apartheid, where the black major ity accept their virtual enslavement and oppression and where the neighbouring countries should accept the dictates of racist South Africa. We salute the front-line States for their resolute stand against the apartheid regime. Apart from the loss of human lives, the material damage caused by South Afr ica's attacks on Mozambique, Angola, Zimbabwe, Lesotho and Botswana represent considerable billions of dollars. In Mozambique, in spite of the Nkomati 1Iccord, South Afr ica continues to sponsor, arm and direct the renegade Renamo group to destabilize the country. On 25 July at Homoine, South African agents of murder carried out one of its grimmest attacks, in which hundreds of civilians were murdered in cold blood. The same ugly spectacle has been repeated several times over in Angola, where indiscriminate attacks have been perpetrated by South African murder squads on civilian refugee camps. These acts of aggression have violated the sovereignty and integrity of African States, causing heavy loss of lives and property. They clearly constitute a threat to international peace and security, which warrants the application of measures envisaged in Chapter VII of the united Nations Charter. we find it deplorable that some Member countries, instead of helping the liberation movements fighting against apartheid, choose to join the racist regime in aiding cOLlOter-revo1utionary groups that are on its payroll to destabilize independent African countries. It is ironical that it is those same countries that oppose the armed struggle against the apartheid regime. It is a well known fact that South Afr ica continues with its aggressive policy and refuses to comply with injunctions of the security Council because of the support and collaboration it enjoys from many Western countries, who are more concerned about the huge profi ts they der ive from exploi ting the resources of southern Africa. South II.frica feels ent>oldened whenever it sees that, rather than getting censure, some permanent member s of the Secur ity Council prov ide it with a protective shield against the imposition of overdue comprehensive mandatory sanctions. In spi te of a near-un iver sal call for conprehensive mandatory sanctions the security Council was, through the use of the veto by ment>ers of the contact group of five, prevented from invoking the minimum economic sanctions which many countries, including the American Congress, have adopted. When a super-Power joins South Africa in arming its UNITA surrogates with sophisticated weapons, the only conclusion one can infer is that its aggressive policy is being encouraged by that super-Power. More recently there have been attempts by prominent leaders in the West to cast the African National Congress of South II.frica (ANC) and other liberation movements fighting for freedom and fundamental rights in southern Africa as terrorists. This is very unfortunate, since in southern Africa the terrorist is the South African regime. Such a posture only encourages SOuth Africa to pursue its internal oppression and State terrorism across its frontiers. Recent developments have led to the isolation of South Africa. Many countries, including the united States Congress, have seen the wisdom of imposing sanctions against the regime. It is the only peaceful avenue left to achieve a solution in southern Africa. These are positive developments. But the gravity of the situation in South Afr ica and the danger it poses for international peace and security demand the imposition of comprehensive and mandatory sanctions. Addressing the 22nd ordinary session of Heads of State and Q:lvernment of the Organization of African Unity in Mdis Ababa on 29 July 1986, President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda had the follO'o'l1ing to say on the question of South Africa: "The Africans in South Africa have attained an impressively high level of po1itical mobilization. It is our sacred du ty to give them the necessary fire-power. The racist regime has tried to hamper our effort and dampen our resolve by way of terror ist acts such as the brutal wars against the front-line States. But we must always rementler that our advantages far outweigh those of the enemy. True, the South Afr ican racists look fierce in appearance) true they are superior in tactical terms, but the biggest weapon in our hands is a comparatively huge population. Our numbers are overwhelmingly superior, and human beings correctly rootivated, mobilized, policitized and properly led and armed will always bring the power of the machine to naught. Our challenge then is to mobilize adequately to prevent the racists from violating the sovereignty of the front-line States and from blackmailing and intimidating us in our resolve in the struggle to cause the absolute collapse of the racist system." There are those who speak out against armed struggle by the liberation movements in southern Africa or express reservations whenever the General Assembly Idopts resolutions which endorse armed struggle. They ought to be reminded that che wars of national liberation in Afr ica took place when it became clear that the racist or colonial regimes did not respond to peaceful initiatives. We find in their posture an element of double-speak or hypocrisy. Some of those who opposed armed struggle have had a problem in sponsoring armed struggle in less deserving cases, including supporting various groups in Angola. The cases of Namibia and South Africa are good examples of where armed struggle is inevitable. As Gibson argues in his book African Liberation toklvements: "Non-violent protest was repressed wi th such violence on the part of the white regime that recourse to violence by Africans seems more a mixture of self-defence and survival defiance of [an] unjust ••• order." expressed its preference for a peaceful solution. It made it clear that: I1 If peaceful progress to emancipation were possible, or if changed circumstances were to make it possible in the future, we would urge our brothers in the res istance movement to use peaceful methods of struggle even at the cost of some compromise on the timing of change. But while peaceful progress is blocked by actions of those at present in power in the Sta tea of souther n Afr ica we have no choice but to give the peoples of those territor ies all the support of which we are capable in the struggle against their oppr essor s. " Since the IJ.1saka Manifesto was produced, the events in southern Africa have confirmed the correctness of the Lusaka Manifesto analysis. Given the intransigence of South Africa and its aggressive posture, armed struggle remains the only viable option. To abandon it at this point in time without south Africa IS beginning to dismantle apartheid would be a dereliction of duty. In conclusion, I wish to reiterate the commitment given by my President of Ugandals solidarity with and support for the people of South Africa and their liberation movements in their just struggle. statement by reciting verse 22 from Surah 30 of the Holy Koran, which reads as follows: And among His Signs Is the er ea tion of the heavens And the earth and the variati.ons In your languages And your colour s: ver ily In that are Signs For those who knew. (The Holy Koran, XXX: 22) From the Islamic point of view, which is the right point of view, the var iatioos in skin colour or language of the peoples are divine signs impr inted upon various members of the human family to enrich them with diversity and variegations. These signs are considered as significant as the creation of the heavens and the earth. These signs are thought-provok ing, inspir ing, but only to the wise, to the learned and, as the Holy Koran says, to "those who know". Indeed, not to the evil, ignorant, naterialistic people, who are prepared to demolish all sublime values in order to secure their vested interests. The crime of apartheid is at least as old as the united Nations, although racial segregation and discrimination predate the Organization. The early founders of th is body thought highly of themselves. They structured the Organ iza tion in such a way as to ensure the predominance of the so-called great Powers over it. In those days they were the advanced, the educated, the affluent, the sophisticated and the victorious. The founders are literally the same champions of human rights. But it took years - and many years - for the tragedy of apartheid to find its way to the agenda of the General Assembly. The founders of the Organization must have either been quite used to crimes, or in a pretty deep sleep, or else, with regard to the horrendous aspects of the crime of apartheid, they must have kept themselves hypocritically busy with anything other than the situation in South Africa, in order to secure thei.r vested interests in that part of the world. It was in 1964 that the privileged founders of the Organization had to ultimately succumb to international pressure and introduce the tragedy of apartheid into the agenda of the General Assembly. Here, we should express our deep gratitude to the backward, so to speak, underdeveloped third world countries and impoverished and downtrodden second-class new Members, who succeeded in speaking for the oppressed majority in South Africa and then convincing the Organization to recognize and inscribe the item on the agenda. Otherwise, had the merrbership been restricted to those distinguished, civilized, advanced and highly educated advocates of deoocracy and majority rule, the outcry of the oppressed majority in South Afr ica would have been kept in their throats by the racist regime until today. To our surpr ise, the prime leaders of the civilized world, the inventors of the greatest technologies, the great Powers - definitely some of them - so to speak, are the ones that have been supporting the apartheid regime. It is they who have been pr ocr as tinating , impeding, fil ibuster ing and us ing all obstructive techniques and finally vetoing every serious, effective decision that really could have otherwise abolished the apar theid policies of South Afr ica. This monkey business by the so-called civilized has continued for a quarter of a century. Consequently, even today, the General Assembly is deliberating over the very same issue which was submitted 25 years ago. All through this long, agonizing period of pain, suffering, deprivation, humiliation, poverty, torture and oppression, which the South African majority has undergone, it is the leading champions of majority rule who have opposed the rule of the majority in South Africa, and it is the leading engineers of human rights machinery who have obstructed the eradication of apartheid. Not only that, but they have even gone many steps further and actually assisted and strengthened the apar theid regime, which has been serving the illegitimate vested interests of the imper ialist POW'ers and their multinational conpanies. It is not accidental that some of the great Powers, which once promised all of mankind freedom from want, freedom from fear, freedom from tyranny and injustice, later became the staunch supporters of injustice, discrimination, oppression and inequality. This is the right moment to realize what the real issue in SOuth Africa is. Is it really the problem of the skin colour that the SOuth African regime just does not like? Is is really the emotional disparity between the whi~ ruling minority and the oppressed majority that explains the nature of the pr ob lem? Or is really someth ing else which manifests itself in the form of racial discrimination and apartheid policies? The sad fact is that the western wing of the great Powers that played the key role in the planning and construction of the United Nations happened to be the great colonial Powers of the world as well. It is the same Powers that were meanwhile struggling for grabbing a piece of one another's colonial Territories; they only hoped that the colonial Territories could be invaded and divided peacefully, and that is how they could manage to agree on colonial boundaries in a "civilized manner". That is how the continent of Africa was dlvided into colonial entities. It is also the same "peaceful" and "civilized" agreements of the great Powers and their junior associates which constitute the highly revered bulk of international law, and the whole world must of course revere and and respect that international law absolutely and unconditionally. If one stUdies the voting patterns of the colonial countries on the issue of apartheid, Namibia and decolonization issues in general, one can clearly observe that those western countries, in the inevitable course of political evolution and anti-colonial development, were bound to abdicate their colonial pursuits and gradually join the ranks of the anti-apartheid countries. The same criterion explains the differences those Wester.n Powers exhihit in their positions towards apartheid nowadays. Those among the western countries that enjoy fewer colonial privileges in South Africa hold a more reasonable position toward apartheid, and those that still enjoy great colonial interestR, like the United States, maintain their unwavering traditional support for the apartheid regime. Colonial policies have regular patterns of treating their victim nations. They subdue their suibjects and install their own agents and lackeys to dominate the victim country in such a way as to control the processes of policy-making as well as the key executive branches. They do not show much concern for the life or property of the indigenous population. Examples of these injustices are overwhelming in the history of Africa and also against the Red Indians during the colonial period in the United states. However, when oolonial aspirations are pursued in conjunction with zionist policies, decolonization becomes an impossibility because in this case the colonial forces actually take over and establish themselves for good by killing, murdering, terrorizing and displacing the indigenous inhabitants from their homeland. The two historic examples of this sinister joining of hands by Zionism and colonialism ana the situations in South Africa and occupied Palestine, where the., local populations have suffered from the most cruel and inhuman treatment simply because the zionist occupiers know no God, no ethical value, no morality and no faith other than the vested interest of multinational companies well represented in the Security Council. Why is it that the great Powers, which arrogate to \ themselves pompous claims of being civilized, those who cannot even tolerate the verdict a just court to corporal punishment, can take the entire nation of South Africa hostage in order to protect their access to gold, diamonds and cheap labour? Why are such aggressive Governments prepared to contradict what they themselves preach to their own people, and even to other nations, about democracy, freedom, independence and human dignity? In brief, why is the United States Government a staunch supporter of the two colonial regimes occupying Palestine and South Africa? My delegation does not wish to reiterate all the oft-repeated facts and figures of the United States military and technological assistance rendered to South Africa, or the nuclear technology which was so easily transferred from the united states to the criminal entity. But I cannot fail to mention that the most advanced aspect of modern war technology was offered to the apartheid regime at a time when the simplest technology required for the production of food for the needy third-world peoples is withheld by the same United States. Only when the militant struggle of the combatants of South Africa is bringing the apartheid regime to its knees do we, surprisingly, observe that partial sanctions find justification in the United States. Indeed, those Governments that are prepared to consider limited economic sanctions against the apartheid regime are the same Governments which rejected economic sanctions against South Africa on the ground that the black majority would suffer. Should we accept that the black majority will no longer suffer in South Africa from now on? Should we not really conclude that it is the militant struggle of the revolutionary people of South Africa that has injected this degree of understanding on the part of the arrogant Powers? Since what date have the oppressors who support South Africa learned that sanctions will not bring economic suffering to the black majority? Why is a decision against the apartheid regime interpreted by the imperialist Powers as an instrument of suffering for the colonialized majority at one time and then the same interpretation changed at another time? i h ' h J'ustifies limited sanctions, the For that change of interpretat on, w lC General Assembly is indebted to the sanguinary struggles of the innocent, unarmed children of South Africa, who are resisting the brutal gunfire of the apartheid regime with their blood and flesh. The United States imperialists are still not ashamed of their "partial" and "limited" support for the racist rulers of South Africa, to the surprise of the innocent and uninformed American people. Let it not go unsaid that only in South Africa and occupied Palestine are childt'en of 9 and 10 imprisoned and persecuted as threats to the ruling regimes in the two bases of imperialism. The terrorist policies of those two zionist entities against women and children are unprecedented, even in the criminal record of zionism. None the less, the filthy material objectives and interests of the So-called civilized imperialist countries can persuade them to deal with both criminal regimes with understanding and compassion and in a forgiving, peaceful spirit. That is why they are always against militant action and advocate peaceful negotiations and gradual reform, when the eradication of apartheid and brutality is an absolute necessity. Our support for the oppressed people of South Africa, like the support of the entire membership of this Organization - but for a few, whom everybody knows _ is not new. Nor is our condemnation of the apartheid policies and the variety of help generously extended to it. My Government stands firmly beside the oppressed people of South Africa and Namihia and strongly condemns the aeartheid regime again and again. It hopes to See a united front in the international body for the eradication of the racist policies of South Africa and the restoration of eauality, justice and freedom for all peoples of all races and ethnic origins living in that part of the ~orld. All the combatants and revolutionary strugglers fighting against the South African regime may rest assured that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Islamic revolution extend them their full support. Mr. ZUZE (Zambia)~ The quest for freedom and equality is inherent in every individuaL The Uni ted Nations itself, aware of this fact, set out a code of standard essential elements for the full exercise by all peoples of basic human rights, which are entlodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Whereas millions of people in the world enjoy those basic rights to the point of taking them for granted, the black majority in South Africa, under the obnoxious apartheiCl system, are denied the exercise of those fundamental rights. Apartheid is a system based on a myth of white supremacy. It is a deliberate policy of institutionalized racism, under which the colour of a person's skin determines his destiny. His colour will determine the toilet he must go to. It is a barbaric system, which civilized people ever~here can 00 ~ithout. It is a system which the Assembly has condenned as a crime against humanity. My country, Zambia, abhors apartheid. we have strongly condemned this evil system for its degrading effect on its victims and have supported any measures aimed at the total eradication of this modern form of slavery. Therefore, my delegation sincerely commends the Special Committee against Apartheid and its Chairman, my good fr iend and brother Major-Gener.al Garba of Niger ia, for the determined efforts to end apartheid. We must continue to urge the Special Committee against Apartheid to employ every available means in sensitizing in terna tional public opinion, so that the plight of black SOuth Africans may receive even greater international support. We note with satisfaction the Committee's detailed report to the General Assembly. It presents a wealth of (Mr. Rajaie-Khorassani, Islamic Republic of Iran) information on the critical situation in south Africa and the recommendations for ending apartheid. It is our fervent hope that this session of the Assembly will greatly contribute to that noble end. There can be no doubt that apartheid is morally repugnant. No self-respecting , Government or individupl can have any credible defence for this abhorrent system. The racist regime of south Africa itself has desperately searched for ways and means of sustaining apartheid in South Africa and Namibia in order to continue the oppression of the black majority. It has juggled with apartheid rules to impress western countries about the perceived communist onslaught in southern Africa. We have heard this defective reasoning over and over again. It is an irrational reasoning which in South Africa's own twisted logic should justify the perpetuation of apartheid. While the international community at large has been unimpressed by this fallacy, we are perturbed that some powerful Western countries have conveniently used it to justify their tacit support for apartheid South Africa. South Africa - at least, for now - has succeeded in the mental destabilization of those Western countries. It can no longer be denied that racist South Africa commits acts of brutality against the oppressed majority in defence of apartheid. It is in defence of apartheid that South Africa has continued to occupy Namihia illegally. It is in defence of apartheid that racist South Africa commits acts of aggression against and destabilization of front-line and other neighbouring States. Yes, it is in defence of apartheid that South African troops are in southern Angola, fighting alongside UNITA bandits against Angola. Only recently South Africa had the audacity to tell the world that the racist leader himself, Mr. Pieter Willem Botha, and some members of his Cabinet were inside Angola to boost the sagging morale of their troops, who cannot understand why they are in Angola in the first place. Zambia strongly condemns this arrogant violation of the sovereignty of Ango1an territory. We call on the international community to condemn this provocative act, which only exacerbates the already volatile situation. (Mr. Zuze, Zambia) Apartheid is the root caUSe of tension and instability in southern Afri<?a:•. Jf,. those Western States that speak of South African security interests really want to contribute to the peace and stability of our region, they should have the courage not only to condemn racist South Africafof its criminal acts of State terrorism, but also to demand an end to apartheid. Those countries must be prepared to support the use of comprehensive mandatory sanctions against the defiant racist regime of South Africa in order that peaceful change can be attained soon. We in Zambia and in the region cannot coexist with apartheid South Africa, but we can and will live side by side, in tranquillity, with a democratic South Africa in which all people, irrespective of their race, have equal rights. That is our principled stand, which will be realized in the end, however long the night. Our goal is to help bring about th~ eradication of apartheid and not so-called reforms. Apartheid cannot be reformed, but it can and must be eradicated. We. have heard over the years the myth propo~nded by Governments which either do not understand the regime's psychology or simply do not want to know for fear of losing lucrative markets. We have been told that economic development is a liberalizing factor in South Africa and that those who wish to undermine apartheid South Africa should increase their trade and investments in that country. Far from enhancing prospects for positive change, those policies have for a long time now only encouraged South Africa in its intransigence in dealing with .the United Nations and .. have helped the racist regime entrench its apartheid system in South Africa and Namibia. We know only too well - and the Western countries know it - that no amount of friendly persuasion can effectively appeal to racist pretoria. We are dealing with a bloodthirsty regime that will stop at nothing to ensure a status auo in South ~frica. Apartheid is by nature a violent doctrine that can only respond to maximum pressure. There are no indications of softening on South Africa's part. If anyt.hing, the so-called reforms that have found sympathy in some Western capi tals are designed to solidify the apartheid structures in South Africa. Are we to believe that the state of emergency now in place in many parts of the country, which only affects the black population, is, indeed, a sign of softening on the part of the regime? The Group Areas Act, by which black people are forced to live in poor, segregated suburbs, is still in place. Wherever we look in South Africa, the picture for black people is gloomy. Whether we look at education for blacks, which is intended to make them better slaves, or at health facilities, which are substandard, or, indeed, at black wages, ~hich are less than one fifth of those received by whites, the picture for blacks is gloomy. I put it to those Western supporters of the regime that South Africa has no plans whatsoever to abandon apartheid, but has every scheme in the book for the preservation of segregation in South Africa. There cannot be an atmosphere conducive to dialogue unless the racist regime undertakes the following measures: first, it must declare that apartbeid is to be eradicated in South Africa; secondly, it must lift the ban on all political parties so that they can freely participate in elections held under universal Buffrage; thirdly, it must release all political prisoners in South Africa, including Nelson Mandela; fourthly, it must abolish all Draconian and discriminating laws; and, lastly, it must withdraw from Namibia to make way for the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) without precondition. The oppressed people of South Africa yearn for peace, freedom and justice - freedom to live wherever they want, freedom of speech and freedom to choose a Government of their own. The countries of the region need peace so that they can turn their energies to economic development. Before those goals are attained, the international community must continue to exert the necessary pressure on the racist regime of South Africa, including those measures provided for in Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. Let this session of the General Assembly be the turning-point in the struggle against apartheid. We appeal to South Africa's allies that this is the time for concrete actions, not for semantics or polemics. There is no time for prevar ication. Apartheid must go so that the people of t;ha1; .; troubled country can live in peace as onl:! nation in which children can grow up ~n,tQ,p, fulfilled adults in peace and freedom.* Mr. LF.GWAILA (Botswana): An innocent and starry-eyed ignoramus from the Western world arriving in South Africa as a tourist, anxious to worship the beauty and bounty of nature with which the land of apartheid is so richly endowed, would, not be bothered by the fact that he or she has just landed in a country out.of· .I·j George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, if not worse. He or she would proceed to feast his or her senses on the wonders of the Kruger National Park and to marvel at the sophistication of city life in South Africa's space-age metropolis, totally oblivious to the real South Africa all around him or her. He or she would be thoroughly bamboozled by the cheerfulness, even in their state of agony and anger, of the black people of South Africa as they scurry about trying to keep up with the routine of life in a perpetually hostile environment. That is South Africa today, but not the real South Africa. *Mr. Jacobovits de Szeged (Netherlands), Vice-President, took the Chair. The real South Africa is a totally different phenomenon. Yes, South Africa is a beautiful country/ sophisticated in the ways of the modern world, technologically advanced in many fields of scientific and human endeavour and relatively highly developed economically in a continent ravaged by poverty and general economic retardation. And yet that very same South Africa, with all its beauty and bounty, evokes as no other country in the world, in many foreigners and locals alike, a morbid fascination. With all its beauty and bounty, South Africa is the land of apartheid, an unremittingly cruel and archaic system of social organization that has been described variously as "a vicious system of oppression and exploitation", the ultimate in man's inhumanity to man, an identical twin of nazism, and "a crime against humanity". Apartheid fits all those descriptions and more. Nowhere else is there any social policy or ideology like it. The anachronism of its existence in this day and age, even in a South Africa notorious for a warped sense of humanity, is beyond doubt or controversy. And yet, innocent South Africans are losing their lives every day inside South Africa Bnd across distant frontiers in struggles for and against the preservation of apartheid. At this very moment, as we are gathered here, young South Africans, Namibians and Angolans are dying in southern Angola, in South Africa and in Namibia in wars of aggression, the raison d'etre of which is the preservation of apartheid. The endless massacres of innocent and helpless civilians in Angola and in the People's Republic of Mozambiaue - by whomever they are perpetrated - are the direct conseauences of pretoria's stubborn determination to perpetuate the apartheid pestilence. The entire region of southern Africa is in turmoil hecause of apartheid. (Mr. Le~waila, Botswana) lThere can be no other explanation or justification for Pretoria's trig.ger-happiness. None of the States of the region is at war with South Africa; it is South Africa which is at war with the front-line States because'df their opposition to apartheid. In other words, South Africa is at war with ~he front-line States because it perceives them as a dangerous threat to the survival of the apartheid order in South Africa. ~hus, despite violent protestations to the contrary, South Africa's white minority rulers remain unshakeable in their unwillingness to courf@enance a South Africa without apartheid, a South Africa in which there would be eauality under the law and, in fact, in a common society. To them, a South Africa without apartheid· would be a majority-ruled South Africa, which they are sworn to resist at all costs. To them, any solution to the problem of apartheid which does not leave the whites in a position of dominance is no better than a 1su ieidal abd ication of power by whites. They are, therefore, not prepared to countenance such an eventuality in their ambivalent search for a so-called new constitutional dispensation for South Africa. There can thus be no doubt as to the real intent of the so-called reforms, which have been celebrated in the West as the beginning of the evolution of a new society in South Africa, a just and humane society in a united, non-racial and democratic South Africa. ~here are indications of the stubborn unwillingness of whites in South Africa to face what we would call meaningful change. The recent white elections were an eye-opener in that respect. To placate the primitive fears of their restless supporters, the fractious Afrikaner political parties competed in those elections to reaffirm in the most strident terms their unrelenting commitment to the apartheid order that has brought South Africa to the brink of catastrophe, where it now stands poised. The whites were told during those elections that voting for the relatively liheral - by South African standards - Progressive Federal Party, traditionally dominated by whites of British descent, would be tantamount to voting for the "communist-inspired" African National Congress of South Africa (ANC). On the lunatic fringe of ultra-conservative Afrikaner radicalism, the message was even more chilling. Whites, particularly the fanatically exclusivist Afrikaners, were told that the National Party's tinkering with apartheid, masauerading as change, had gone too far and was having the effect of depriving the volk of its racial and cultural heritage in the name of reform - a truly frightening message for a community to which racial and cultural exclusivism is synomymous with survival. Even those South Africans of British descent, who had hitherto manifested in their electoral choices the residual political liberalism of their origins, flocked to the Afrikaner-dominated National Party as if to seek refuge in its already beleaguered laager. The rest scurried to the latter-day self-appointed custodian of Afrikaner orthodoxy, the Conservative Party, which represents white supremacy and baaskap in its raw and undiluted form. Those elections were not only irrelevant to the extent that they shunned any constructive debate on the future of South Africa, but they were also dangerous to the extent that they inflamed the passions of a society which has been in the grip of a violent convulsion for more than four years. They reflected a new mood of white intransigence. By the very nature of the message they conveyed, wittingly or unwittingly, to the oppressed majority of the people of South Africa, they amounted to a clear invitation to more violent confrontation in the country. Yet the leader of the National Party had this to say in celebrating the Py~rhic triumph of his party: "There are people who say that the recent election was irrelevant to )ur black peoples" - not that they own black people in South Africa. "It was not. In this election, the white electorate gave me an overwhelming mand. :e to negotiate with representative leaders of our black communities and grm IS about our common future. These negotiations will not be a struggle for domination and power. They will be an honest meeting of men of peace and good-will, a meeting that must and will produce the solutions to our problems. I say this with confidence, because I am well aware of what the needs and desires of our peoples are.'· Note that Mr. Botha says he is aware of the needs and desires of "our peoples", which include the blacks. If the elections delivered an overwhelming mandate to the National Party, was not, in our view, a mandate to negotiate a realistic constitutional order w :h the real leaders of black South Africa, but a mandate to continue to tinker witl apartheid, to continue to avoid the inevitable. That is not the kind of mandatl that can liberate South Africa from the bondage of racial tyranny. Mr. Botha claims to know the needs and desires of "our peoples", black SOuth Africans included - a claim negated by his refusal to confront the real leaders o~ black South Africa at the conference table to negotiate a democratic future for South Africa. He speaks of wanting to negotiate with "men of peace and goodwill" even as his Government continues to brutalize and incarcerate genuine leaders of blC\ck South Afr ica and proscr ibe their organizations. He speaks of "solutions to our problems" even as he continues to insist that the outcome of his brand of negotiations will not be an abdication of power by whites. The needs and desires of black South Africa are well known and can be articulated only by black South Africa itself. Indeed, those needs and desires are the subject of the 32-year-old Freedom Charter, which has been described as a communist document by Mr. Botha's Government. Communist, apparently, because the document says: "We, the people of South Africa, declare for all our country and the world to know ••• that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, and that no Government can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of the people." What is communist about South Africa's belonging to all the people of South Africa? What is communist in the assertion that "no GoVernment can justly claim author ity unless it is based on the will of the people"? Is that not the basis of democracy as we have known it in the West? Yes, there are men and women of peace and goodwill in black South Africa who would be happy to negotiate South Africa's future with Mr. Botha, the genuine leader of white South Africa. Men and women of peace and goodwill, genuine leaders of black South Africa who, unfortunately, cannot negotiate with Mr. Botha now because he has locked them up and, consequently, Mr. Botha cannot, in the ir absence, negotiate anything meaningful with his own version of black leaders. The fact is that black South Africans have always been ready to negotiate their country's future. The Freedom Charter bears testimony, a historic testimony to this fact. Their incarcerated leaders were passionate advocates of a consti tutiona1 convention before they were silenced. But negotiations then and ho. must have a realistic purpose and be conducted in an atmosphere conducive to mean~ngful dialogue. It would, therefore, be sheer self-deception of the leaders of the white side if they thought that meaningful negotiations could be held in thE Kind of atmosphere that now prevails in SOuth Africa. In the first place, as the situation stands in South Africa today, the leaders of the white side have no one free to negotiate with them on the black side, because the leaders of the black side have been sent to prison by the leaders of the white side. Secondly, the leaders of the white side have banned the political organizations of the black side, through which the black side ought to articulate its aspirations. Thirdly, the white side has enacted a welter of discriminatory and oppressive laws, under which no meaningful dialogue or negotiations with the black side can take place in South Africa. And, fourthly, the white side, in a systematic and deliberate attempt to suppress the black side's agitation for freedom and justice, has imposed a country-wide state of emergency. This is how polluted the atmosphere in South Africa has become. And this pollution is in addition to the impossible and presumptuous conditionalities imposed by the white side on the initiation of negotiations. The white side, the source of all the violence consuming South Africa today, has demanded the cessation of violence by the black side, when basic logic and justice demand that the initiator of the violence should be the first to cease such violence. The white side also ins ists that negotiations must take place under the auspices of an institution, the so-called National Council, unilaterally created by the white side to serve its own interests. That cannot be. How can an apartheid institution Jileaningfully negotiate the abolition of apartheid? Black South Africans are justified in demanding that before they can participate in any serious negotiations, their leaders must be freed, all other political prisoners must be released, their political organizations must be unbanned and allowed to operate freely in their country, the state of emergency must be lifted, and all apartheid laws must be rescinded. But, even assuming that South Africa's white rulers were realistic enough to see the enormous virtue of opening up their political prisons to allow Nelson Mandela and his colleagues to lead their people in the search for a solution to the problem of their country, the million-dollar questions would remain unanswered. Is the regime in Pretoria ready to negotiate seriously, or does it still labour under the delusion that, even so late in the day, apartheid can still be sugar-coated and sold to black South Africans? Is the regime ready to negotiate the tbtal aboli tion - and I mean total aboli ticn - of a policy which, as recently as a few year sago, was viewed by Afr ikanerdom and its Dutch Reformed Church as a divine prescription for the survival of the volk, the Afrikaner nation, in its racial and cultural purity? In other words, is the regime finally ready, once and for all, to accept the principle of majority rule and all that entails? Is it ready to accept the ineluctable fact that it is only in a united, democratic and non-racial South Africa that the tragedy of apartheid can become a thing of the past? (Mr. Legwaila, Botswana) We are not talking here of half-measures, reforms or incremental TOCldernization of racial tyranny, or such other stratagems contrived to perpetuate racial inequality and injustice in modernistic guises. We are talking about real change., fundamental change, change real and meaningful enough to constitute a demonstrable difference between the apartheid South Africa we know and hate and the SOu th Africa without apartheid which we seek to bring about. (Mr. Legwaila, Botswana) Understandably, we harbour extreme suspicions. If the Pretoria regime is ready for meaningful change, must it demonstrate such readiness by the escalation of acts of aggression and war against its neighbours? Must it become even more vicious to its own people inside South Africa? Must it increase its terrorizatioR I of an already enfeebled and cowering press? Must it start a new, vicious war against universities and academic freedom in general? All these negative goings-on in south Africa today justifiably heighten our suspicions about the true intentions of the rulers of that country. We have seen them in action before. We know that any hint of movement forward in the war against apartheid has often provoked the worst of their racial instincts. The memory of their brutal invasion of three Commonwealth countries in May of last year, on the eve of what could possibly have been a momentous breakthrough in the search for a negotiating mechanism sponsored by the Commonwealth, is still fresh. Nevertheless, those of us who come from southern Africa cannot afford to lose hope. We still believe options are still open for peaceful change to take root in South Africa. We from the African continent and the world at large together can shorten tbe duration of the present phase of the conflict in south Africa, but only if we can all increase, not decrease, the pressure for change and escalate and inflate the price, the cost, of maintaining apartheid. The west, in particular, has an important role to play in nudging South Africa forward, because it is the West which has often served as the cheerleaders for South Africa's so-called reforms. The West must tell South Africa that only real change, not reforms, can save that country. It must say enough is enough and act accordingly to see to it that Pretoria gets the message loud and clear. Otherwise, not only will the people of South Africa, the oppressed majority, lose faith for ever in peaceful change if the door to such change remains barred and locked, but the West itself will derive no benefits at all from the escalation of vio1enc in southern Africa. So the choice is yours, Pretoria's influential friends. Mr. LASARTE (Uruguay) (interpretation from Spanish): This debate is almost as old as the united Nations itself. Since 1946, when the establishment of discriminatory legislation against Sou 1 Africans of Indian origin was denounced, the aeartheid regime has year after year warranted urgent and persistent attention by the General Assembly. If the evolution of the subject over these 40 years is traced, it is difficult - even given the ever-increasing agenda items concerning disparate sUbjects - to find an~ subject that has more preoccupied the main and subsidiary bodies of the Organization. Along with the question of Namibia, apartheid has taken up the greatest number of meetings of the General Assembly and the Security Council, special sessions of the General Assembly and special international conferences, an no other auestion has been the sUbject of so many reports, statements and resolutions - not only as a specific subject but also as one that has an impact on other subjects, including those on the agendas of certain specialized agencies of the United Nations system. In the seven main Committees of the General Assembly, there are many references - direct or indirect, explicit or tacit - to the apartheid regime. In addition the subject is given close consideration throughout the year by special bodies such as the Special Committee against Apartheid and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, and special specific units within the structure of the Secretariat, such as the United Nations Centre against Apartheid, which has a genuine and very valuable data bank on all national and international events relating to South Africa. Consequently, looking at the facts objectively, and without trying to diminish the political and even emotional significance of other hotheds of international tension, it can be seen that the importance of the subject under discussion cannot be compared with that of any other SUbject on the Assembly's agenda. The reason is simple but profound. Being demonstrated here today are overpowering sentiments of the international community that have existed since the end of the Second World War: condemnation, rejection and repudiation of a system that runs counter to history, a system that lacks even minimal doctrinal justification of any kind, a system that has elevated repression to State policy, a system that - above and beyond differences of style and nuance - unites the many delegations that are yet again, as they have for many years now, participating in deliberations on apartheid. The strength of those sentiments explains why the voting pattern on the great majority of Assembly resolutions adopted on this subject in this decade has been very close to unanimity. As to the origin of this universal rejection, it is to be found in the vitality of that conscience that transcends borders and ideologies, that recognizes the inherent, inalienable dignity of the human person without distinction as to race, sex, language or creed, as expressed in the Charter. There still exist many other oppressive systems that violate human rights, but none has dared openly to deny to recognize human dignity, or to institutionalize discrimination and racial segregation. As my delegation stated here in 1985, South Africa's challenge to the international moral conscience is so open that it does not even have to be proved: it is self-proclaimed. (Mr. Lasarte, Uruguay) conscience is not only total) it also My country's identification with that t th f our """n inner convictions. Our has the spontaneity of being a natural ou grow 0 ..". , . 1 d s imply out of our people's rejection of the apartheid regime ar1ses pure Y an age-old rejection of any manifestation of racism whatsoever. stated in a press communique two years ago, this is a tradition that has been strengthened in Uruguay throughout its independent life and is today an inalienable legacy of our national values. The international sentiment of repudiation for apartheid has been and must continue to be an active awareness, one not limited to mere words but one that is action oriented. In the Security Council pressure against the Pretoria Government has been intense, but without really using the complete range of enforcement measures set forth in Chapter VII of the Charter. Although nearly 10 years ago the Council adopted an unprecedented decision against a Member State by impos ing a mandatory arms embargo against South Africa, it is a well-knONn fact that it has been impossible to adopt other multilateral measures of greater weight. Until we find the necessary consensus for the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions, my delegation supports the idea of co-ordinating, under closer international supervision, the punitive measures that have been or are to be adopted against South Africa at the national or regional level. The lack of concerted action has so far attenuated and diminished the impact of such measures. With regard to the present internal situation in South Africa, Uruguay reaffirms its condemnation of all existing measures that support the mechanisms of repression and oppression that are systematically being applied against the majority of the South African people. The state of emergency has only gone to hinder prospects for peaceful change. It is impossible to build a non-racial, democratic and united South Africa with the forced silence of the voices of the As our Gover nment oppos,i'don , with the detention without trial of .thousands of 'persons ,in'<:::luding ~omen and children, with the banishment of leaders and political organizations and with censorship of all media. Uruguay considers that the unconditional amnesty of all political prisoners and detainees is a fundamental premise for South Africa to begin a process of ~ ignificant negotiations with the representa tives of all sector s of opinion. In this connection Uruguay appeals yet again to the GOITernment of Pretoria to lift the sta te of emergency, to release Nelson Mandela and all other political pr isoners, to guarantee the safe return of all poli tical exiles and to rescind the ban on all organizations. The people of South Africa cannot free themselves and build a democratic and egalitar ian society merely by relying on a process of historical determin ism. In addition to its own forces it needs the concerted, lucid and pragmatic support of the in terna tional communi ty. Uruguay has no doubt that that support is and will always be the very essence of international morality. Mr. FRANA (CzechoslOlTakia) (interpretation from Russian): OUr Organization has struggled to achieve the total elimination of colonialism, racism and apartheid since its creation in 1945. HCMever, in spite of all our efforts, more than 20 million indigenous South Africans and Namibians are still being subjected to brutal racial discrimination and exploitation. Tension continues to build in the South African subregion, pr incipally because of the unending policy of apartheid and aggression being pursued by the Government of South Africa and its continued illegal occupation of Namibia. The maintenance of a hotbed of tension in South Africa serves the interests of the racists, the neo-globalists and the militarist and strategic goals being (Mr. Lasarte, Uruguay) pursued by certain States, in that part of 'the' .world. In response to the-g'rowilng protests of the indigenous population the Pretor ia regime has stepped up its har: 1\ repression to an unprecedented degree. The victims of its racist cr imes _are woml 1, children, participants in peaceful gatherings and meetings. It is well knownth. ;- since June 1986, when the state of emergency was reintroduced, more than 40,000 .._ people, at least 6,000 of whom are children and young people under the age of 18 1 have been arrested and detained without trial. By such actions the Pretoria regime is openly demonstrating its contempt for the united Nations, the countr ies members of the Non-Aligned Movement, the Organization of Afr ican unity and the whole of the wor Id community, which have called for the prompt and final end to apartheid. It is displaying its contempt with shameful manifestations of racial oppression, glaring crimes against mankinc and gross trampling on human rights. No one is misled by the cosmetic measures recently taken by the (bvernment c South Africa under pressure from the opponents of apartheid within the country an beyond its borders in an attempt to cover up the most flagrant manifestations of that policy. The so-called elections held in South Africa in May of this year, which were confined to the white minority, again confirmed that the apartheid regime has no intention to give way voluntarily. In tandem with the repression of its own population, South Africa is steppin up its aggressive and destabilizing policies towards neighbouring countries. Thi can be seen in the continuous incursions of South Afr ican units into the sovereig territory of the People's Republic of Angola and other independent African States The South African racists also support the subversive organization, TJNITA, and RENAMO, the so-called Mozambique Resistance Movement. The South African regime i a1so,attempUng to destabilize the legitimate Governments of African States, thereby constituting a serious threat to peace and security in the region. 'It is quite clear that Pretoria could not continue to implement its policy of apartheid and aggression without the continuing and comprehensive support it receives from its political and economic allies. Although the representatives of some States condemn the policy of apar:theild words, when it comes to deeds they closely co-operate with it. The exploitation natural resources and cheap labour, together with geo-peli tical goals, are place far above the interests of the oppressed population of South Afr ica and of human rights - about which the representatives of these States so love to prate, so 10 as they do not relate to southern Africa. Particularly disturbing is the co-operation of certain Western countries an Israel with the South African racists in the military sphere, including the nucl sphere. South Afr ica already has the capacity to produce nuclear weapons) this poses a real threat to Africa and to international peace and security in general It is clear that comprehensive mandatory sanctions consistently imposed by the security Council and the addition of new, more effective measures constitute the only way to make the South African regime abandon a policy that grossly debases human dignity. We fully agree with the Special Cozmnittee against Apartheid that, in order I achieve a just and lasting settlement of the situation in southern Africa, we mUl adopt effective sanctions. Selective sanctions full of loopholes and other vagul steps cannot br ing about a radical change in Pretor ia 's position. We disagree wj certain members of the Security Council who reject the adoption of mandatory sanctions against the racist regime of South Africa. They argue wi thout foundatj that, if the United Nations were to adopt and consistently implement comprehensh ecooomic sanctions, the indigenous popula tion of Sou th Africa would suffer moste all. The truth, however, is quite the reverse. CzechoslOllakia consistently and fully participates in the international community's struggle to eliminate apartheid in South Africa. In conformity with General Assembly resolution 1761 (XVII), we have ceased all co-operation with Sou Africa and maintain no political, economic or other relations with it. Our position of pr inciple on the struggle against apartheid in South Afr ica has not changed. We maintain a boycott against South Africa. We support all measures at various governmental and non-governmental levels aimed at eliminating apartheid. We demand the immediate release of all political prisoners, first and foremost Nelson Mandela, Chairman of the African National Congress of South Africa. Czechoslovakia expresses its full solidarity with the heroic struggle of the peoples of South Afr ica and Namibia and the national liberation movements, led by the African National Congress of South Africa and the South West Africa people's Organization. We shall continue to provide political, moral and material support and assistance to those legitimate repres.entatives of the peoples of South Africa and Namibia. I reaffirm that Czechoslovak ia will suppor t any measures in the united Nations that can effectively prolOC>te the elimination of the shameful apartheid regime. Mr. 'ISVETKOV (Bulgar ia) (interpretation from French): The General Assembly must again discuss the question of the policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa. In spite of the international conununity's tireless efforts totally and finally to eliminate the degrading system of apartheid, the racist regime of Pretoria has persisted for four decades in its inhuman policy of racial segregation and massive terror against the black popUlation of South Africa, in. its illegal occupation of Namibia and in its acts of aggression aga inst independent African States. The tension and threa ts to regional and interna tional peace and security to which this policy gives rise are all the more dangerous in our complex world. That is the reason for our unanimous concern at and condemnation of the system and the apartheid policy in South Africa, which must immediately be supplemented by decisive and concrete action to eliminate that policy, which would put an end to that abominable phenomenon - a remnant of oolQlialism - in this dangerous centre of international tension. This year again the international community was witness to Pretoria's attemp s to perpetu.ate the apartheid system in South Africa, to curb the deco10nization of Namibia and to establish domination CNer the countries of the region. Despite total censorship and despite the wall of silence erected by the raci t autbiorities, information reaches us daily about stepped up repression and terror 8ga.cU\iSt the local population. Instead of tak ing steps to overoome the deep political crisis by eliminating apartheid and beginning negotiations with the trlJ leaders of the oppressed majority, the racist authorities have extended the statE of emergency declared in June 1986, enabling the police, the army and belligerent elements tu> act severely with impunity and unopposed. Listed in section B of chapter IIt of the report of the Special Committee against Apartheid (A/42/22) al the atrocities and acts of massive brutal repression perpetrated against the population of South Africa, which the apartheid regime has transformed into an arbitrary police state, where illegal acts are the rule. An entire people 's struggle agains t racism and apartheid and the pressure of international democratic opinion have forced the Pretoria regime to resort to cosmetic reforms of the apartheid system, which hardly aim at its elimination. Their true aim is to div ide the people, undermine res istance to aFar theid and mislead international public opinion. The illegal occupation of Namibia is another illustration of the cr imina1 nature of apartheid. In conjunction with the transnational corporations of cert< Ln Western States, South Africa is stepping up the plunder and exploitation of the Territory's natural and human resources in flagrant violation of Decree No. 1 of the United Nations Council for Namibia. Refusing to accept or implement security Council resolution 435 (1978), the racist regime is drawing up plans for a so-called internal settlement and for the dismemberment of Namibia's territory. With that policy they are attempting to impose a neo-eolonial settlement of the question of Namibia and to keep Namibia in the sphere of the political, economic and other interests of certain imperialist circles. and the presence of Cuban troops in the People's Republic of Angola falls within that context. This obstructive conduct has been pursued despite decisions of the united Nations, Summit Conferences of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and t Organization of African unity (OAU), which have many times categorically rejected attempts to jeopardize Namibia's independence by linking it to artificially creat, auestions that have nothing to do with the problem. The undeclared war against neighbouring independent African States, in particular Angola and Mozambiaue, is moreover a constant element that characterizE the policy of the apartheid regime. At a time when the General Assembly is discussing the policies of apartheid pursued by South Africa, the racist regime's troops are carrying out direct military action against the People's Republic of Angola, striking into the heart of its territory, which certainly constitutes an unprovoked act of aggression against an independent, sovereign State. The Pretori authorities do not try to conceal their expansionst actsJ far from it, they are openly revealing to the world the aggressive nature of apartheid, thereby cynicall defying international pUblic opinion. The recent presence of President Botha and several Ministers of his racist Cabinet in the area of the aggression against the territory of the People's Republic of Angola constitues an unprecedented, provocative example. According to a statement of the South African Minister for Defence, in doing so President Botha showed his commitment to and personal responsibility for the criminal acts of the racist regime. By this policy of State terrorism and aggression, using its own military machine and abundantly financed hands of mercenaries, through UNITA and RENAMO, Pretoria is seeking to destabilize neighbouring African States and undermine their struggle against lmperialism, colonialism and apartheid. ,The infamous system of apartheid in South Africa has for a long time - and quite correctly so - been described by the international communi ty as a crime against humanity. The Pretoria regime's policy of terror and racial (Uscdmination, its illegal occupation of Namibia and acts of aggression perpetrated against African countries are also a very grave and real threat to international peace and security. At present there is no other international problem on which the international community agrees so unanimously in its condemnation and for the total and definitive elimination of which it is convinced it is necessary to take joint action without further delay. Despite all that, apartheid continues to exist, to hurl new challenges at the international community and to threaten the peace and security of the peoples of the region and of the world. It is no secret to anyone that apartheid in South Africa continues to exist because of the assistance certain western States and their transnationa1 corporations give it on behalf of well-known corrupt interests. The protection given to South Africa by two countries members of the Security Council has on several occasions made it impossible for the Council to impose mandatory sanctions against the apartheid regime. In turn, this has encouraged south Africa to perpetrate further crimes against humanity and peace. The interdependence of the world today and the very indivisibility of peace make it increasingly urgent for States to rid their policies of old prejudices. The realities of the nuclear era reauire new approaches, without which it would be Mnthinkab1e to consolidate the general security of States. We consider, therefore, that no argument could justify the policy of certain forces that support and protect the apartheid regime and encourage it in its arrogant attitude and aggressive policy. The People's Republic of Bulgaria supports the just and legitimate struggle of the peoples of South Africa and Namibia against the apartheid regime, headed" y their national liberation movements the African National Congress of South Afric (ANe) and the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO), and the struggle f the front-line States to defend their national sovereignty. At the same time, w< support the efforts and actions of the international community designed to isola e and totally eradicate the system of apartheid in South Africa. The People's RepUblic of Bulgaria fully accepts the conclusions reached by le World Conference on Sanctions against Racist South Africa, held in Paris in June 1986, on the need to adopt a comprehensive programme of action the basic element of which would be the application of comprehensive mandatory sanctions against the racist regime pursuant to Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter ~ I being the most appropriate, effective and peaceful way to end apartheid, bring about the decolonization of Namibia, and establish peace in the southern part of the African continent. We have no doubt that the verdict reached by the international community on this infamous phenomenon of the twentieth century, the odious system of apartheid in South Africa, will be implemented. The time is not far off when apartheid wit be eradicated and freedom, human dignity and peace will triumph in southern Africa. The international community should no longer permit that this be achieve, at the price of new victims and sufferings. We must not allow events of the regil 1 to gain further strength and speed, leading to bloodshed and destruction. To prevent such a development by contributing to the prompt eradication of the systel of apartheid and establishing lasting peace and security in the region is, in OUI view, the major responsibility of the United Nations, above all the Security Council. Bulgaria is resolute in its decision to participate actively in the efforts . the international community is making now and will make in the future for the total elimination and final eradication of colonialism, racism and apartheid, and for the 'establishment of lasting peace and security in that region of the world which has already suffered so much. (Mr. Tsvetkov, Bulgaria) a great honour for me to have the privilege of delivering this statement on behalf of the delegations of the two Yemens in order to express once again our solidarity with the people of South Africa in their struggle against the apartheid policies q the racist regime of South Africa. One of the basic principles of the Charter is that of non-discrimination on grounds of race, language or religion. Those principles express the genuine aspirations of all peoples. Therefore, we should continue to develop and deepen world awareness and highlight the need for the eradication of the policy of apartheid. It is a paradox of the twentieth century, which has seen so many great achievements, that the people of South Africa still suffer from oppression and racial discrimination and that the practices and crimes of the racist regime in South Africa against the African continent still impede the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978), which calls for the immediate, unconditional independence of the Territory of Namibia. The horrifying policy of the racist Pretoria regime has led to greater awareness and greater international solidarity regarding the struggle against racial discrimination. Indeed, it is the collective conviction of the international community that the racist regime is a crime against humanity and a threat to international peace and security, and that it cannot be reformed but must be eradicated. The regime persists in its policy of racism and discrimination, stubbornly denying the people of South Africa their fundamental rights, in violation of the most elementary principles of the Charter of the United Nations. Moreover, the racist regime in South Africa persists in its policy of aggression and ,in its acts of destabi1ization and terror against the African peoples in general and the independent African front-line States in particular. The dangerous developments and conditions in South Africa show that, if it genuinely desires the eradication of the apartheid policies of the racist regime, the international community should restore its credibility by imposing against the racist regime in South Africa comprehensive sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter, put an end to the opposition of some Western countries and take serious practical measures to ensure the implementation of the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia, in accordance with Security Council resolution 435 (1978). The policies adopted by some Western countries, under various labels and names, to justify their dealings with the racist regime have encouraged that regime to be inflexible and stubborn and to invoke extraneous conditions which have nothing to do with the independence of Namibia, such as the withdrawal of Cuban forces from Angola. We wish to reiterate our condemnation of the policy of apartheid and our conviction that the people of South Africa cannot be conquered because they are defending a just cause. We believe that the international community can play a positive role by providing more assistance to the peoples of South Africa in their struggle, as well as to the African front-line States, in order to enable them to cope with the acts of aggression of the Pretoria regime. It is also our duty to reveal the close co-operation between the two racist regimes, in South Africa and Israel, particularly in the military and nuclear fields, and to show the dangers of such co-operation for the African and Arab peoples. ~) We hope that consideration of this item at the current session will have a positive outcome which will serve the struggle of the peoples of South Africa anc Namibia and accelerate the eradication of the policy of apartheid. Mr. GREHO (Ghana): The Ghana delegation is speaking to contribute to 1 le General Assembly's consideration of the report of the Special Committee against Apartheid concerning the policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa, The debate this year is of particular significance. As we gather in this He .1 of peace deliberating the maintenance of international peace and security and thE development of friendly relations among nations, the South African defence force~ are engaged in fighting Angolan Government forces on the sovereign territory of Angola. The scale of the conflict poses ominous threats to the peace and stabilJ .y of the region and the world at large. The security forces of the racist regime continue brutally to suppress dissent and demonstration, and the outside world is shut out of the country by means of rigid censorship. The fact of the matter is that verbal condemnations and the declaration that apartheid is a crime against humanity have done very little, if anything, by way f influencing South Africa to dismantle its apartheid system. The political situation in South Africa and the entire region continues to deteriorate as a result of the racist regime's refusal to engage in serious and meaningful negotiations with the leaders of the disenfranchised majority of South Africans, who are seeking the creation of a non-racial and democratic society in that country. In the face of this intransigence, the oppressed South Africans have no alternative but to defy the racist regime, which has mounted a co-ordinated viole t assault on all forms of opposition in South Africa. Instead of addressing itself to the solution of the political crisis, Pretoria prefers to deal with the situation by imposing a state of emergency designed to create an atomosphere of terror and fear. Among the atrocities perpetrated under the state of emergency are the shooting of black demonstrators, forced removals from black townships, indefinite detention without charge of large numbers of people, especially many young persons and children, and the imposition of draconian restrictionS on press freedom. But the constant escalation of repression has hardly stemmed the wave of resistance. It has only driven many of the popular organizations and their members and leaders to operate strategically but equally vociferously under near clandestine conditions. The recent strike of about 340,000 gold and coal miners, which was most widely supported, is a case in point. Nor is the racist regime's brutal repression confined to the Republic of South Africa. The regime has carried its repressive and destabi1ization machinery into the independent front-line African nations. In line with its thirst for hegemony and expansionism in the region, the Government of Pretoria has continued its acts of aggression and destabilization against neighbouring States. In doing so, it has wrecked the economies of the front-line States, resulting in untold hardship among their populations. (Mr. Gbeho, Ghana) The Angola experience that is currently going on is a classic example ofSoU\ African destabilization. As a result of South African aggression and military an( logistical assistance to UNITA, Angola has suffered vast humall and economic losses. Where is our Charter? Where are our lofty principles? Mozant>ique is one other country that has fallen victim to South African aggression. South Africa's nefarious activities are estimated to have cost Mozallt>ique heavy material and human losses. Here too there is no let-up, even though Mozambique enjoys the sympathy of the united Nations. Pretoria provides full support to RENAMO, also known as the Movement of National Res istance, in full breach of the Nkomati peace accord which Mozambique and South Afr ica concluded not too long ago. The RENAMO forces are reported to have massacred several hundred civilians in Mozambique, including women, children and the elderly. Such acts of aggression and destabilization against Mozambique have not only damaged Mozambique's economy but have caused many Mbzambicans to flee the country. Thus, an estimated 500,000 Mozant>icans are living as refugees in neighbouring countries. Nor have other front-line States, including Botswana, Swaziland and Zambia, escaped South African aggression and destabilization. One would have thought that given the current deteriorating political situation in South Africa, the racist regime would reassess its position, face the real! ties of the day and free all political prisoners and enter into serious negotiations with the leaders of the various political groups for an acceptable settlement. On the contrary, however, it continues to be driven by the false hopes that it can win on the bas is of its military machinery and the support of its friends in the united Nations. What the apartheid regime has forgotten is the fact that no one can suppress indefinitely the legitimate aspirations of a people. The same stubbornness is partly the cause of the present impasse over the Nations first addressed the question of Namibian independence, and it has been over 20 years since the United Nations terminated SOuth Africa's Mandate over Namibia by General Assembly resolution 2145 (XXI) of 27 October 1966 and placed the Territory directly under the responsibility of the United Nations. Nine years ago the security Council adopted resolution 435 (1978) setting a framework for Namibia 's independence, and yet SOuth Afr ica has continued its illegal occupation of the Territory, while that resolution remains unimplemented. About a fortnight ago - on 30 October to be exact - the Security Council adopted resolution 610 (1987), authorizing the secretary-General to arrange a cease-fire between the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) and South Africa to enable the Namibian independence process to begin. That resolution was adopted over the linkage argument that, as a pre-eondi tion for Namibia's independence, Cuban troops should wi thdraw from Angola. One would therefore 1 ike to hope that the ongoing open aggression by Pretor ia aga inst Angola is not part of a calculated effort by Pretor ia to block the mandate of the secretary-General. The perpetuation of the policy and pr actice of apar theid by SOuth Africa and the racist regime's defiance of the international community are among the issues that have preoccupied the Organization for a long time. That the Organization has been unable effectively to deal with the issues exposes a fundamental weakness in the United Nations. Under the cover of the voting mechanism in the Security Council a few Member States have deliberately and for untenable reasons frustrated the wishes of the majority in dealing with SOuth Africa. Although those Member Sta tes claim they are against apartheid, they have not gone beyond verbal condemnations of the apartheid regime. In the circumstances there can be no doubt that the intransigence of the racist regime der ives to a great extent from the support that it is assured by only a handful of Members of the united Nations (Mr. Gbeho, Ghana) which, regrettably, have placed national commercial profit before their Chartel obligations. The Government of Ghana continues to believe that the only effective meaSl :e that will bring apartheid South Africa to its knees is a co-ordinated internatl )nal· effort aimed at isolating South Africa politically, economically and socially. Ghana therefore renews its call for the imposition of comprehensive mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa. In the meantime we renew the call to GoIJernments, artists, sports men and women and sporting organizations the wor1c over to intensify the cultural isolation of South Africa through the programme )f· the cultural boycott initiated by the United Nations Special Committee against Apar theid. Before concludin9 I wish to allude to a few important points that generall ' affect the consideration of the policies of apartheid at the united Nations. First, there is the protection that certain Member States wittingly or unwittingly give to th~ racist Pretoria re9ime through their negative attitude towards all actions against that regime. Their objections to br inging South Af lea to book are almost invariably preceded by the admission that apartheid is wrong that apartheid is indefensible and that the black majority deserve better treat ent than they receive at the hands of apartheid and the racist regime. But then, t at is the end of their sympathy. It is our belief that, if apartheid is to be eradicated or violence racial confrontation avoided in that hapless country, SO th Afr ica 's fr iends at the United Nations will have to do more than pay lip-servic to the need for change. Secondly, there have been concrete cases of certain Member States break ing the Security Council embargo or resolutions in favour of South Africa and that are ei ther silent on the matter when challenged or choose to hand out inconsequenti 1 recent sale of blueprints of naval submarines to the racist Pretoria regime by a company in the Federal Republic of Germany, with the knCNledge of its Government. A lot of time has passed since investigations began, and a final word is still awaited in the matter. Indeed, it is rum::>ured that it is intended to impose only a light adminis trative fine on the company in question in the Federal Republic of ~rmany as soon as this debate in the General Assembly is over. This is a serious natter, and my delegation wishes to call upon the delegation of the Federal Republic of Germany to clarify this issue before our debate terminates. The role of the Federal RepUblic of Germany in the international effort to eradicate apartheid is further vitiated by the reported sale of helicopters of west German origin to South Africa. No doubt our colleagues of the Federal Republic of Germany would like to thrOot1 some light on this report as well. The traditional· threat that any criticism of the GoII'ernment of the Federal Republic of Germany may affect aid is, with the greatest of respect, no longer tenable. Support for the practice of apartheid, whether direct or indirect, kills and dehumanizes Africans, and our colleagues should understand that fundamental truth. (Mr. Gbeho, Ghana) Thirdly, we believe that history has exposed the lie that Israel does not collaborate with South Africa. The laws enacted this year in the Israeli Parliament to limit the scope of Israeli co-operation with South Africa are in themselves an admission of the fact of collaboration. We know that the change wal a direct result of the laws enacted recently in the united States Congress. The Israeli actions therefore do not go far enough. However, half a step is better than no step, and we call on the Israeli Government - while appreciating its present effort - to take action in line with the international community's abhorrence of the system of apartheid and not to try to hoodwink international opinion. Finally, we are constrained to point out to our brothers and sisters in Cote d'Ivoire that we strongly disagree with them on their recent decision to grant landing rights to South African aircraft in their country. While it is their sovereign right so to do, they cannot deny that all the relevant resolutions of tt United Nations and the Organization of African Unity have urged Member States to withhold such facilities. with that decision, Cote d'Ivoire is inviting South African destabilization into the West African sub-region, and we fraternally reauest them to rethink this serious step. We hope that, in addition to the adoption of the draft resolutions now before the General Assembly, Member States will redouble their efforts to eradicate apartheid from South Africa and from the world.

I call on the representative of Cote d'Ivoire on a point of order. Mr. ANAKY (Cote d'lvoire) (interpretation from French): I thought I heard a few moments ago, in the statement of the representative of Ghana, a reference to my country, stating that we had granted landing facilities to South (Mr. Gbeho, Ghana) Mr. NOGUEIRA-BATISTA (Brazil): Apartheid is a universally condemned practice and concept. For Brazil in particular, apartheid is a totally unacceptable notion, contrary as it is to our national ethos, law and traditions. As a socially unjust political practice, it negates the most fundamental characteristics on the basis of which Brazilian society has been built as a nation culturally and racially integrated. It is distressing to realize that after so many years we are still discussing, at the highest international forum, the auestion of apartheid in South Africa. It is all the more disturbing to note that no progress has been achieved towards a peaceful and just solution to the problem. Paradoxically, contrary to our efforts and our desires, what we are seeing is the radicalization of policies by the South African Government and conseauently an incremental deterioration of the situation in that country. In the view of Brazil, no future exists for a doctrine meant to give legitimacy to a social order within which the very few show no constraint in subjugating the great majority on the grounds of their ethnic traits. The Government of South Africa has up to now demonstrated no willingness to promote reforms that take into account the legitimate rights of the vast majority of the population of that country and the aspiration of the international community to bring apartheid to an end. By its attitude and behaviour South Africa has progressively isolated itself from international life and, in a way which is inherently interlinked with its unjust policies of apartheid, has been unable to maintain peaceful relations with its neighbours. During the official visit to Brazil last May of Archbishop Desmond Tutu, one of the strongest opponents of apartheid, the Brazilian people and Government had the occasion to reiterate their steadfast support for the cause of the oppressed majority in South Africa. The illustrious visitor could personally feel it in hi many contacts in Brazil. The "democratic goals sought by the majority of the South African people will certainly l,be attained. The tempo of the elimination of apartheid is, however, cOQtingent upon the international community deciding to strengthen the machinery an4~i,scaleof the sanctions which must be applied against the Pretoria regime. ~~The Brazilian Government has systematically supported the imposition of sanctions against south Africa. Furthermore, it has unilaterally decided to appl restrictive measures which reflect its firm disapproval of South African racism. Over the course of the years, Brazil has undertaken a series of legal and practic 1 actions that reflect our intention to enact sanctions against apartheid, in accordance with all relevant United Nations resolutions, which include, inter ali , the prohibition of cultural and sporting exchanges with South Africa; the banning of the export of oil and its byproducts, of arms and ammunition and of licenses a d patents; the absence of trade and tourism promotion; the absence of investment, a d the discouragement of South African attempts to negotiate technical and economic co-operation projects. In the same spirit, Brazil has developed, bilaterally and through the Southe n African Development Co-ordination Conference, intense and diversified co-operatio with the front-line States, which suffer more directly from South Africa's acts c aggression and destabilization. Through those channels we reaffirm our belief i~ the practice of social freedom and equality and Brazilian solidarity with those countries. We remain committed to participating in the process of reconstructio~ (Mr. Nogueira-Batista, Brazi) and development, to which we hope they can fully dedicate themselves once foreign aggression ceases. I wish to state in conclusion that Brazil will support the eight draft resolutions contained in documents A/42/L.26 to L.32 and in document A/42/L.36, of which we are a sponsor. the General Assembly the situation in South Africa has deteriorated further. Not only does the racist Pretoria regime in South Africa continue with its repressive policies of apartheid in flagrant violation of the principles enshrined in the Charter, but it does so with impunity and without regard for humanity. The black population of South Africa continues to be deprived of equal statu~ and its inalienable right to freedom and justice. Such inhuman treatment of the blacks under the system of apartheid as practised by the Pretoria regime is an insult to the human race. My delegation's view is that the perpetuation of apartheid cannot be justified under any pretext; apartheid in its totality must be abolished. Despite world-wide condemnation of its apartheid policies, the Pretoria regim maintains its adamant stand and ignores international calls for it to dismantle th system of apartheid. Against the increasing voice of dissent at home and abroad, the Pretoria regime introduces more draconian measures designed to consolidate its unjust rule and silence any opposition to its policies. The regime now Seems more firmly embarked on a policy of "apartheid now and apartheid for ever". In an effort to silence opposition the racist Pretoria regime has announced a new emergency regulation banning meetings and gatherings of all kinds by South Africans to prevent them from doing or saying anything to bring about the release of persons detained because of their opposition to apartheid. Among those detainee are children whose only crime was to oppose the injustices imposed by the regime upon them and generations before them. While the black South Africans continue to be denied their basic rights, the international community is locked in a debate about how the apartheid system can best be dismantled. Despite resolutions adopted by the General Assembly condemning the apartheid policies, we are now no nearer to bringing justice to th~ oppressed people of South Africa. Although there is unanimity in our rejection of apartheid, we are still hesitant about the measures to be taken to exert pressure on the Pretoria regime to make it see that apartheid should be abolished. Our hesitancy has indeed strengthened the hands of the Pretoria regime and resulted in further SUffering for the people in South Africa. Violence has become commonplace in South Africa as ever more blacks have concluded that they have no other way to protest against the apartheid regime. It is up to the international community to convince them that all hope is not lost. We must continue our efforts to dismantle apartheid and bring pressure to bear against the racist regime to do so. My delegation views the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions as a way of indicating to the Pretoria regime that we have grown impatient with its intransigence and continued repression of the blacks. At the same time, it would reassure the black majority that the international community is also in the forefront and fully supports the struggle to liberate them from the .racist regime's gross injustices and policies. In this way we can hope to offer the aggrieved people of South Africa an alternative to violence, and prevent further tension in the region. But, if the world community appears to be divided on the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions at the cost of continued suffering by the blacks and others in South Africa, anger and violence may be unleashed. It is for that reason that Brunei Darussalam supports the imposition of such sanctions in the hope that the Pretoria regime will take genuine, concrete measures to end apartheid so as to avoid unnecessary bloodshed. As Archbishop Desmond Tutu once said: "The onus is on those who do not want sanctions to provide us with a viable, non-violent strategy to force the dismantling of apartheid." We also deplore south Africa's policy of intimidation of the front-line States and its indiscriminate attacks on neighbouring countries. Such acts of aggression are unwarranted and indicative of South Africa's sense of insecuritYJ they deserve to be condemned. Brunei Darussalam remains steadfast in its opposition to the racist regime il South Africa and hopes to co-operate with other States in our united effort to eradicate the evil system of apartheid. We must not waver in our condemnation or action, so that the pretoria regime feels increasingly isolated. We believe that the Pretoria regime will seriously consider negotiations if enough pressure, especially external pressure, is exerted on South Africa. My delegation pays a special trihute to the Special Committee against Apartheid for its unrelenting efforts to mobilize public opinion and ensure the ending of apartheid. We wish to assure the Special Committee of our continued support for its work. We also welcome the Secretary-General's efforts to see thal justice eventually prevails in South Africa. Mr. FARAH DIRIR (Djibouti): Another long year full of uncertainties hal elapsed since this body discussed the same topic last year, and many resolutions and decisions have been adopted by the United Nations. International conferences have made solemn declarations in opposition to the policy of apartheid and many Governments have appealed to and brought considerable pressure to bear on South Africa to redress its apartheid practices. However, it is unfortunate that none c these methods has been successful in altering South Africa's uncompromising state of belligerence. undoubtedly the international community will be compelled to intensify its energy and face up to the challenge of persuading South Africa to desist from its unlawful treatment of the black South African majority. For the black South African majority this debate coincides with the beginning of yet another year in which no peaceful settlement may be in sight and the sUffering of the black communities under brutal oppression and genocide will continue to breed perpetual tension and confrontation, leading to violence and mass destruction. Such a state of affairs will continue as long as South Africa, in spite of the abundance of its natural resources and mineral wealth, remains for the overwhelming black majority the most hostile environment, where inequality flourishes on a large scale, injustices spread like forest fires, and the oppressor and the oppressed always live in constant fear of a spontaneous explosion. The predominant attitude that nurtures the policy that the black and white races are diametrically opposed and are too incompatible to coexist harmoniously has played the central role in the apartheid policy, which discriminates against the overWhelming black majority of the population, condemns it to a system of segregated employment, education, medical care and travel, and forces it to live in saualid townships and settlements where members of the community have been reduced to a state of servitude in which they provide a convenient pool of cheap labour on which the economic machinery of the apartheid regime is geared to prosper. Such outmoded attitudes have become the driving force of the apartheid ystem, which continues to make provision for acts of intimidation and torture to s~ due the black African majority whenever that majority sees no choice but to prot st peacefully against the intolerable social, economic and political conditions imposed upon them. As long as the South African regime remains the protector of the interets o~ the minorities, and as long as foreign economic interests are involved in St h claims and attitudes, south Africa will undoubtedly continue to justify its olley of systematic subjugation, imprisoning black majority leaders, incapacitatir those who challenge them peacefully and disrupting the peace of innocent black fan .lies by scattering them to oblivion. Undoubtedly also, no matter how destructivE the atrocities inflicted, the black South African majority will continue to strt rgle for their cause with enviable courage and determination so as to realize the .r legitimate aspirations to freedom and justice. The South African regime, confronted with moral bankruptcy and pertur~ I by the keen resistance of the masses and the moral victories which the freedom fighters constantly gain against the regime, will stop at nothing to step UI its obnoxious military and police brutality and violence. Thus, the intensificc :ion by the apartheid regime of its campaign of hlatant intimidation and harassment 19ainst the black people of South Africa SUffering under the continued and unrelent: Ig state of emergency has created an unprecedented reign of terror. For how long must the international community stand by and watch the overwhelming black majority of the South African population remain in bondac and deprived of their most elementary human rights. The South African regime has always refused to abandon its obnoxious policy of apartheid. Whenever pressure has mounted as a result of international opposition and condemnation reinforcing internal resistance, the racist regime has either reverted to the escalation of terror by intensifying its military and police repression and violence, or has insulted the intelligence of the international community by attempting to mislead it with the introduction of so-called new constitutional reforms, which have proved to be another odious face of its apartheid policy and have led to yet another strategy of confrontation, leading to intensified violence and P91ice brutality directed against the black majority of South Afr ica. The South African regime, unaffected by the international pressure exerted and heedless of international appeals, has become ever more defiant in continuing its aggressive attitude and repeated breaches of the peace, not only within the country, hut across and beyond its borders. The South African regime and its collaborators continue to threaten the security of the southern African region with covert manoeuvres of unprovoked aggression and hostile acts of economic, political and social destabilization directed against the front-line states in order to paralyse them and prevent them from extending support to the liberation struggle in South Afr ica and Namibia. It is obvious that the South African regime could not have succeeded in carrying out its apartheid practices and its blatant acts of aggression against the front-line States, in defiance of United Nations resolutions and decisions, had it not been for the Clelayed action of the Security Council and its failure to adopt more effective measures to persuade South Africa to conform to the wishes of the . . 1 . If there is any kind of wisdom in delaying the adoption lnternat10na commun1ty. by the Security Council of effective sanctions against South Africa, surely that wisdom must virtually be working against the hopes and aspirations of th, black South African majority. We belie'le that such a failure is a breach of t !Jst and betrayal of the legitimate struggle of the South African people for free. ~m and justice. Any policy contrary to the eradication of the evil system of apartht id frustrates and contradicts the most elementary laws of human rights rela1 ing to ' liberation of mankind from the most degrading bondage. Any policy in Sll] port of and in sympathy with the apartheid regime is incompatible with the princ ;>les an4 Charter of the United Nations and is doomed to failure. what is needed 1 :lW, in 1 face of the potential danger to international peace and security of Soutl Africa ' belligerance, is a uni'lersa1 commitment to apply stringent measures aga11 ~t Soutl Africa to bring an end to the agartheid practices perpetrated against tht black South African majority. What is also needed is a new, global awakening of moral and polit iCe l forcel that should soon gather enough strength to hring enough pressure to bear )n Soutl Africa to compel it to lift the state of emergency, release Nelson Mande: l and aJ other political prisoners and detainees, withdraw all emergency forces fl )m the African townships and desist from its apartheid practices, so that majorj :y rule can triumph and the Afr ican masses decide their own destiny and achieve leir constitutional right to create a free, non-racial, democratic society. We believe that peaceful change in the southern Africa region can bE brought about only by applying appropriate and effective means. For as long as le racie regime of South Africa does not abandon its hideous policy of apartheid : must k isolated by imposing on it comprehensive mandatory sanctions as provided :or in Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. We believe that if all Governments apply and respect the provisions of the ft\l, 1;11" sanctions the South African regime will come to its senses and a new era of ~!~;1 f reassessment of the rights and privileges of the overwhelming black South African w;; ;:)~ majority will dawn over that part of Africa where the rights of man have been trampled for many decades. In this regard, we call upon all Governments and institutions of the international community to co-operate in the mobilization efforts for the imposition of appropriate and effective sanctions against south Africa so that it comes to terms with the black South African majority in achieving its legitimate aspirations to freedom and justice. (Mr. Farah Didr, Ojibouti) Mr. TILLETT (Belize): Throughout history various forms of subjuga1 lon have been used to oppress the black peoples of the world. Colonization and I are two of these methods used in the last four centuries. Economic discrimir is a modern version of black subjugation. But probably the most heinous of 1 Ieee methods is apartheid. Practised today only by South Africa, apartheid is an official State policy of white supremacy. In South Africa there are approximately 26 million blacks and 4 million whites, yet that nation's apartheid policy makes the black majority racial, ! ~ial and economic slaves of the white minority. Last year in Harare, before the Government of South Africa outlawed television news coverage, I watched an interview with a Mrs. Botha. When she was asked why she supported apartheid. she replied that they did not want to have any little brown babies. So apartheic has even become a form of birth control. Since then racist South Africa has restricted the news media by the fol] Ming methods: first, no one must film, photograph or tape record in areas of unrE ,tJ secondly, no one must report on actions by the Security Forces without the permission of the police, thirdly, no one must pUblish or make a subversive statement - the racist regime determines what is subversiveJ fourthly, no onE must call for boycott actions; and, fifthly, the racist Government can close down or up to three months any newspaper it believes promotes civil disobedience or boye tts boycotts or promotes the image of so-called radical groups. Another expression of apartheid is the SUffering caused to, the aggressi n against and the destahilization of neighbouring States. Like South Africa, a 1 its neighbouring States have a black majority. Since the racist South African Government cannot afford to have black leaders successfully developing natior on its doorstep, it has decided that aggression against and destabilization of t ose A states are support mechanisms for the policy of apartheid. No front-line State has been spared. Angola has lost 60,000 lives. Almost one tenth of its population has become homeless and 150,000 of its people have become refugees. South African aggression has cost Mozambiaue over SUS 5 billion, and over 100,000 people in Mozambiaue have lost their lives at the hands of the racist South African regime. An additional 500,000 Mozambicans have become refugees. Botswana, Lesotho, Swazi1and, Zambia and Zimbabwe have all felt the stinging hand of apartheid. The report of the Special Committee against Apartheid is very clear on the damage South Africa's apartheid policy has inflicted on the front-line states. It states that "The regional conflict created by apartheid is impeding economic development by disrupting transport, creating vast numbers of refugees and necessitating increased military spending. It is estimated that in the five years from 1980 to 1984 South Africa's aggression and destabilization efforts cost the nine countries of the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference (SADCC) more than SUS 10 billion and that by the end of 1986 the figure rose to over sus 18 billion. To note just one area, for example, the infant and child mortality rates in Angola and Mozambiaue are now estimated to he the highest in the world because of 'underdevelopment compounded by war and economic destahilization and the resulting set-backs and dislocations.'" (A/42/22, para. 52) The crimes committed by racist South Africa against the press and against the 'ont-line States are enough to incur the wrath of the international community, !su1ting in comprehensive mandatory sanctions against the racist regime. But the rocities it has committed against its own people, the black majority of South rica, are what have caused apartheid to be called "a crime against humanity". To name just a few of those atrocities: first, a state of emergency ha been, in force since July 1985; second, it was renewed in December 1986 and again n June 1987; third, in May of this year an election was held in which only whi es could vote; fourth, detention without charge or trial has been used on child en as a weapon of intimidation; fifth, vigilante groups have been organized with t e tacit consent of the police to attack and murder members of the opposition; ixthi black South Africans are being forcibly removed from their homes to live els wherel seventh, entire townships have been sealed off with blade-wire; and, eighth, Soweto has been sealed off with a cement wall. But the attack on their children is the most revolting. Of the 30,000 ersons i detained since June 1986, 40 per cent are children 18 years old or younger. According to the special Committee against Apartheid, black children have be ome the target of violent repression by the State. In August alone 3,000 people ~ere imprisoned under the state-of-emergency regulations; 300 to 500 of those per ons were children under the age of 18 and some were only 12 years old. The Spec al Committee's report states: "Many children have been seriously injured, some have been tortured wit electric shocks and tear-gas and some have died as a result of violence by the security forces." (para. 36) As part of the interrogation of the children police used whips, metal-tipped =lubs or strips of rolled wire to hit them. Police even scalded the children with boiling water and burning plastic. How can any nation, for any reason, still give aid and succour to racis South Afr ica? Those who do so are creating a radical black leadership for the fut re of South Africa, a leadership bearing the scars of apartheid. The future of South Africa is not really uncertain. The black majority will govern-south Africa. That is certain. What is uncertain is how long it will take and how much hardship the whites are prepared to create for themselves before they concede black leadership. P.W. Botha has vowed that there will never be black majority rule or a black Head of State in South Africa. That is like an ant saying to a man, Myou cannot move me. M If the ant does not move, the man simply steps on him. That is the situation apartheid has created in South Africa. White South Africans are afraid. They are afraid of losing their positions; they are afraid of losing their possessions; they are afraid of their children having brown babies; they are afraid that the blacks will do to them what they are now doing to the blacks. When Jesus was crucified he prayed for his crucifiers, saying: "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." But we must remember that there has been only one Christ, and the white South Africans know what they are doing. All they can ask for from the blacks now is mercy. And the longer they continue the policy of apartheid, the more difficult it will be to find blacks who are prepared to be mere iful. (Mr. Tillett, Belize) This Assembly is very well aware of the position of Belize on aparthei I. Apartheid cannot be reformedJ it must be eradicated. We support resolutio~ condemning apartheid. The Belize Government carries out no trade with Sout I Africa and we have passed lE!9islation making it a crime to import goods, directly Ir indirectly, from South Africa. That crime is punishable by imprisonment, f nes and confiscation of those goods. Even with our restricted economic situation, he Belize Government contributed 8,847 Belize dollars to the African fund to a sist front-line States. We sincerely wish we could do more, and we call upon th se States that can to do so. Many of us in Belize have our roots in Afr ica, and we provide a good e ample of what South Africa could become in the future. Belize is a multiracial SI ciety where blacks, Hispanics, Mayans, Ketchis, Garifunas, whites, Arabs, Asians, Orientals, Jews and others all live together in peace and harmony. Only whl n the black majority in South Africa assumes its rightful leadership role will Srn th Africa enjoy such peace and harmony. Apartheid is not good for anyone - not for those who practice it, not j )r those who support it, not for those who are its victims, and not even for tl )se who are removed from it. No issue on our agenda should unite the united Nation~ more than this one. The fastest way we could accomplish that would he for no nat .on to reauest a vote on the draft resolutions submitted under this item aod for tt Assembly to adopt them by consensus, which would send the right message to t le racist regime of Pretor ia and demonstrate to the black peoples of South Afd ia that the international community has heard their cry for freedom and that help is on the way. Mr. McDONAGH (Ireland): My delegation fully associates itself with the views expressed in this Assembly by the representative of Denmark, on behalf of the 12 member States of the European Community, in condemnation of the policy of apartheid practiced by the Government of South Africa. My purpose in making this statement is to underline certain aspects of Ireland's approach to the issue. The Irish poetSeamus Heaney speaks to us in a recent poem of a journey to the Republic of Conscience. He is asked by an old man he meets there to ·consider myself a representative and to speak on their behalf in my own tongue·. Their embassies, he said, were everywhere, but operated independently, and no ambassador would ever be relieved. Conscience must indeed animate us as we turn our attention once again to apartheid. Apartheid continues to haunt us as an example of man's cruelty to man. It is one of the great surviving evils of modern times, an odious monument to prejudice and intolerance. In an era when societies the world over are moving, however slowly in some cases, to put behind them the injustices of the past, apartheid in all its essentials lives on tenaciously. Those who have constructed the system remain apparently insensitive to values other than their own and to the advances made in human relations and human rights during this century. The value of the human person, which is enshrined in the Charter of this Organization and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is something to which they remain supremely indifferent. ~o provide by law and decree that the political, economic, social and civil rights of an individual in his own country are decided by the colour of his skin is to challenge a fundamental premise, which the international community has worked for 40 years to estahlish and whose roots go far back into human civilization. Just when we hoped that mankind was being pointed definitively in the directio of a future based on a higher regard for freedom and eauality, white South Africa shows us its determination to perpetuate the unacceptable iniquities of the pa t. This is a shameful state of affairs which all civilized men and women mus repudiate. Ireland stands unequivocally opposed to the evils of the apartheid system and is ready to co-operate in all efforts to hasten its end by peaceful means. Apartheid is directly contrary to the fundamental values of equality a justice, to which our own history has given us a particular attachment. The policy of apartheid as conceived and operated by the South African Government is without parallel in the world today. It is a constitutional, institutionalized and codified form of racism which embraces all areas of humal activity. It is held in place by a phalanx of laws and regulations which have :he effect of ruthlessly denying minority rights in all walks of life and of systematically denying the majority of the community its basic human and polit: :al rights. It is a system in which the dignity of man is affronted on a daily bal .S and where, for the majority of the population, ineaua1ity and disadvantage are central to every aspect of their lives. There can be no other society in the world today in which an individual i! excluded from participation in the political process solely because of the co1c .r of his or her skin. The vast majority of South Africa's citizens find themse1t s disenfranchised in their own country. Countless black South Africans have beer condemned to a lifetime of political, social, economic and cultural isolation because of the accident of their skin pigmentation. These are monstrous injustices, which the Irish Government wholeheartedly condemns. We reject a society in which a small minor ity has claimed and centinues to claim a total monopoly of power and has defended that monopoly with systematic policies of racial discrimination and oppression. We reject a society whose political system is based, formally and explicitly, on racial distinction. No democratically-minded man or woman can have any sympathy for a country whose Government is drawn exclusively from, and elected exclusively by, a community representing approximately 20 per cent of the population. South Africa is also uniaue in the level of violence which the Government finds it necessary to unleash against its own citizens. White minority power in South Africa rests on what is probably the most heavily armed and eQuipped police and military machine in Africa. The Government appears to have recognized that it can no longer govern without the aid of repressive security measures. Over the past year and a half, since the nation-wide state of emergency was imposed in June 1986, we have seen, despite the Government's media-censorship laws, a steadily rising level of violence and terror. Hundreds of people, mainly blacks, have been killed, either at the hands of the security forces or in internecine conflict. Thousands more, mainly blacks, have been arrested and detained without charge or trial, often for months on end. The recently pUblished report of the Special Committee against Apartheid gives US Borne idea of the level of political violence in South Africa and of the part played in it by the security forces. It mentions unofficial estimates that, since September 1984, over 2,3UO persons, most of them black, have been killed in South Africa, mainly by actions of the police and military. It estimates the number of detentions since June 1986 at 30,000. It reports that the occupation of the townships by the police and army, including the presence of armed men in classrooms, has become institutionalized. It tells us that, in 1986, about 64,000 black South Africans were forcibly removed from their homes, compared with ~ ',000 in 1985, and that nearly 100,000 black South Africans were arrested for tree ~s8ins, A particularly disturbing and sinister development is the inclusion of thousands of schoolchildren in the ranks of those detained without trial in out1\ Africa. According to figures pUblished in the Special Committee's report, n le8s than 40 per cent of the 30,000 persons detained since June 1986 were chi1dre aged 18 or younger. The Ministry f~r Public Order recently admitted that 11 of t ! children in detention were less than 16 years of age. There have also been numerous reports of torture and ill-treatment of children in custody in Soutl Africa. In all this a terrible "vicious circle" inevitably operates. The violence of the State apparatus is steadily alienating South Afr ica's black youth and encouraging them to resort to violent resistance. In addition to the escalation of repression, political developments over the past year or two have re flected the unal tered determina tion of the South African Government to defend the status quo. Last year President Eotha announced that the hated pass laws had been rescinded. However, the impact of what appeared to be a significant concession was nullified when new rules were issued which required racially designated identity documents of everyone. In May of this year elections were held - but for whites only. The outcome was sadly predictable and laid to rest any hope that greater willingness to seek dialogue with the majority leaders might be forthcoming in future. The new constitution can be seen only as a transparent attempt to entrench apartheid. The objective of the so-called betterment schemes introduced by the author Hies recently in a number of black communities seems primarily cosmetic. The Irish Government is deeply concerned at the failure of the SOuth African Government to insti tute meaningfUl poli tical reforms. Apart from a few superficial adjustments, Pretoria has done nothing which even remotely threatens the apartheid structure. The grim reality is that after decades of international protest the underlying policies remain absolutely unchanged. The bantustan policy of the establishment of so-called homelands is perhaps the most blatant example of injustice under apartheid. Over 3 million black South Africans have been uprooted from their homes and forcibly removed to these barren wastelands. Ireland has consistently joined the wor ld community in denouncing th is policy and refus ing to accord the so-called homelands any legitimacy or recogni tion. Conscious no doubt of its increasing vulnerability to world criticism, the South African Government has tried to deflect the glare of world attention by (Mr. McDonagh, Ireland) imposing draconian media censorship laws. Ireland deplores this assault on 1:1' fundamental principle of freedom of information and calls for the immediate revocation of these laws. We have deep sympathy with the victims and opponents of apartheid within Africa, who have, in our view, shown exemplary patience and fortitude. They t eve been consistently prevented from working for changes in the system by peacefu: means. If now they turn towards violent res istance, they do so from a sense c growing helplessness. My Government would not wish to condone such violence, lut we can understand the deep fr us tr a tion which gives rise to it. The action which South Afr ica has taken outs ide its border s to shore up 1 ,e apartheid system has had des tabil iz ing cons equences elsewh ere in the sou thern Afr ican region. The dea th s of sever al South Afr ican soldiers in south er n Angc .a in the past few days provide fur ther evidence, if such was necessary, of South Africa's hostile activities against its neighbours. Ireland unreservedly cone imns SOuth Africa's armed incursions into neighbouring States and its support for paramilitary movements opposed to the Governments of those States. Tb the extent its resources make possible, Ireland endeavours to registel its profound disapproval of apartheid and those that practise it. As a matter of policy, we do not maintain diplomatic relations with South Africa. Official contacts with South Africa ar.e avoided. There is no Irish public investment lere and the Government does not encourage trade or other economic relations with .• From the beginning of th is year the impor ta tion of agr icultur al produce from )uth Africa into Ireland ceased on foot of a Government order. There are no Irish companies with Subsidiaries in South Africa and, therefore, none reporting un ~r the European Communi ties Code of Conduct. 'I'here are no cul tural, scientific r sport.s agreements between Ireland and South Africa. In accordance with its support for the principle of non-discrimination in sports, the Irish Government has done everything possible to prevent sporting cootacts between Ireland and SOuth Africa. My GoITernment refuses to give financial assistance to I rish sports organizations which engage in contacts in South Africa. We have also prevented representative South African teams from tak ing part in s];X)rts competitions in Ireland. Ireland also believes that it is of the utmost importance to make humanitarian and legal assistance available to the victims of apartheid. We have supported - and, within the limits of our resources, continue to support - the United Nations Trust Fund for South Africa and the united Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa, as well as the efforts of a number of non-gO\Ternmental organizations. Some of the victims of apartheid now live outside South Africa as refugees. Over the years Ireland has received a number of them for training in economic and social development under the auspices of programmes run by international organizations, particularly the International Labour Organisation (lID) • Ireland is also concerned about those countr ies in southern Afr ica which have suffered as a result of South African aggression or which, because of their geographical location, are burdened by an unfortunate degree of economic dependence . upon their large and frequently hostile neighbour. In order to assist those countr ies, Ireland participa tes in the wor k of the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference. We have also included two of the countries concerned as priority countries in our progranune of bilateral development co-operation. In these various ways Ireland is determined to demonstrate at national level its abhorrence of 'apartheid and its solidarity with those both inside and outside South Africa who suffer from it. However, it has long been the view of my GOvernmen.t that protests by individual states and unilateral actions by them a a unlike~y to be effective in persuading the South African Government to face up reality. The real persuasive power lies in action taken collectively by the international oommunity against white South Africa. We can only hope that the steady and careful application of pressure by the international community will in time compel the South Afr ican Gaver nment to recogn ize reality and br ing to an ~d its catastrophic policies of apartheid. As a member of the &1ropean Community, Ireland consistently supported the adoption of common measures designed to place ~e SOuth African Gcwernment und r such pressure. In 1985 and again in 1986 we agreed with our partners in the Communi ty on a series of restrictive measures, including a ban on new investmei ~s,·' a ban on the import of iron, steel and gold coins from South Afr ica and a ban I 1 oil exports to South Africa. Ireland is implementing all these measures in fu L. we will continue to co-operate with our community partners with a view to strengtnening and, if possible, expanding this series of measures. Beyond th is, Ireland has for many year s been among those coun tr ies which support the impos i tion by the securi ty Counc 11 of a set of manda tory sanctions against South Africa. We recognize that sanctions do not always produce the desired results. We believe, however, that the international pressure brought :0 bear on South Afr ica through a set of proper ly handled mandatory sanctions cou: indeed be the means of forcing the Sou th African Government to accept that it t IS no alternative but to abandon apartheid. In our view, the sanctions should be selected carefully and applied in a graduated fashion. To be effective they Wl lId have to be proper ly imposed by the Secur ity Council and fully implemented by a: We have, indicated these views on many prvious occasions in the Assembly. Together with like"'1l\inded delegations, Ireland has sponsored in successivl " years the draft resolution on concerted international action for the eliminati( I of ! apartheid, which, inter alia, urges the security Council to consider the adoption of e.£fective mandatory sanctions. From the overwhelming major ity with which the resolution has been adopted each year it is clear that the international community as a whole accepts the argument that concerted international pressure on South Africa is required if there is ever to be fundamental change there. The per Us of the course on which South Afr ica is engaged are obvious to every single delegation here. Unless and until south Africa can be brought to abolish its disastrous policies, countless black South Afr icans will be born into a life of misery and degradation. OUt of their despair will spr ing an understandable anger. We should recall Bishop Desnond 'futu's words when he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize three y~ars ago. He said: "Violence is not being introduced into the SOuth Afr ican situation de novo from ou tside the south African si tuation is violent already and the primary violence is that of apartheid, the violence of forced population removals, of inferior education, of detention without trial and of migratory labour systems." The continuing violence of the state, expressed directly through repressive security measures and more indirectly through the daily cruelties of apartheid, may cne day have an explosive effect, breeding counter-violence on a scale which will engulf the whole of South Africa. The situation poses grave dangers to the peace and stability of the entire southern Africa region and ultimately of the African continent. '."-'-,'.' t Ireland fervently wishes to see the problems of South Afr ica resolved through peacefUl negotiation. There can be no lasting solution in SOuth Africa which does not involve the complete dismantling of apartheid. But it should be dismantled peacefully. (Mr. McDonagh, Ireland) This appeal is directed in the first instance to the South African Gcwerr which must accept that the days of aertheid are over and work peacefully wi1± the majority community to establish a nelf social order. It is also, however, dire ted to the majority community. Whatever their values, whatever their history, whc ever the hardships they themselves have had to endure, they too must seek a peacefu accommodation, knowing that sooner or later major ity rule is inevitable. Winnie Mandela put it succinctly when she told an audience of funeral lOOurners that "no bullets or armies can stop an idea whose time has come". Ireland's wish is to see a mUltiracial, denocratic society peacefully established in South Africa in which merit, not race, will fix the position 01 the individual in the life of the community, in which all will be entitled to live as full citizens with equal rights and responsibilities, and in which the doctril: I of the brotherhood of man will at long last prevail. The meeting rose at 9.20 p.m.