A/47/PV.62 General Assembly

I should first like to draw the attention of the General Assembly to the report (A/47/616) of the Special Political Committee. May I take it that the General Assembly takes note of that report? It was so decided.

Further, I should like to propose that the list of speakers in the debate on agenda items 33 and 34 be closed tomorrow at 12 noon. It was so decided.

I therefore request those representatives wishing to participate in the debate to inscribe their names on the list as soon as possible. I call first on the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid. Mr. GAMBARI (Nigeria), Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid: Last year, when the General Assembly considered the policies of apartheid of the Government of South Africa at its forty-sixth session, developments in South Africa gave us reason to feel cautiously optimistic that the negotiating process had acquired sufficient momentum to enable the parties concerned to agree on a new constitutional order and forge ahead towards a non-racial, democratic and united South Africa. Although the political process which began in February 1990 had indeed been characterized by delays and setbacks, the parties concerned were none the less able to enter into agreements which should normally have improved the climate for negotiations. We had also hoped that by now the National Peace Accord of 14 September 1991 would have become fully operational, and we were expecting to have achieved by now reduced levels, if not altogether the end, of the violence that had engulfed the country. Our hopes were founded in part on the fact that the United Nations system was undertaking concrete and constructive initiatives to assist the process of peaceful transition in South Africa. As a result of the agreement entered into by the South African authorities and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees on 4 September 1991, thousands of South African exiles were able to return to their country. In addition, a large number of political prisoners were also released. Furthermore, the outcome of the Whites-only referendum, which took place in March 1992, seemed to strengthen the hands of the South African Government to speed up the process towards the realization of a new, non-racial and democratic South Africa. Unfortunately, however, violence continued and subsequent developments in South Africa have taken a turn for the worse. The entire world witnessed how the continuing political violence and the inability whether deliberate or not of the South African authorities to control it, brought to a halt the negotiation process and the expected transition to a non-racial democracy sooner rather than later. The efforts and achievements of several months hard and intensive work by the political parties concerned and by the international community to keep the negotiations on track were suddenly, unfortunately, put in serious jeopardy. The hopes and high expectations of the people of South Africa seem to have been dashed once more. The massacres at Boipatong and Bisho, which occurred at the time negotiations were breaking down, further heightened fear, distrust and polarization throughout the country. During these difficult months, it was to the credit of the United Nations and other intergovernmental organizations that they spared neither time nor effort to help restore the climate necessary for the political process to take root in a deeply troubled country. The Security Council, which convened at the request of the Organization of African Unity, provided a forum for all parties to state their positions and unanimously condemned the violence. The Security Council further urged the South African authorities to bring an effective end to it and to bring those responsible to justice. The Council called on all parties to cooperate in curbing the violence and to ensure the effective implementation of the National Peace Accord. We are indeed most grateful to our Secretary-General for his timely dispatch of a Special Representative and observers to help defuse the political tension and promote an environment of dialogue and communication, in which serious and constructive negotiations will indeed be possible, in order to bring about a just and lasting solution in South Africa. All major political parties and organizations in South Africa have welcomed the presence of United Nations observers as well as of other international organizations such as the Commonwealth, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), the European Community and various human rights organizations. At a time of fundamental restructuring of the United Nations, it should be pointed out that the work of the Special Committee and that of the General Assembly remain part and parcel of an important international effort within the fold of the United Nations, whose positive weight and influence are increasingly being felt in South Africa and elsewhere. The work of the General Assembly is also complementary to the current efforts and initiatives undertaken by the Security Council and the Secretary-General. Thus the increasing functional coordination of United Nations organs and agencies is likely to bear greater fruit in the future. I shall return to this point later. It is the view of the Special Committee that during the difficult transitional period ahead the General Assembly should continue to promote the implementation of the consensus Declaration on South Africa with special regard to the necessary climate for negotiations, a culture for human rights observance and political tolerance, which constitute a sine qua non for the effective formulation and implementation of a shared vision of South Africa by all of its people. In this connection, the Special Committee welcomes the release of 42 political prisoners on 15 November 1992, following the earlier release of some 150 political prisoners in late September. The long awaited freedom of these prisoners no doubt brings joy to their families and friends, and greatly (Mr. Gamhari. Chairman, Special Committee against Apartheid) contributes to an atmosphere of goodwill. However, the Special Committee expresses concern at the continued ill-treatment of prisoners and the high number of deaths occurring in police custody as reported by the press and human rights organizations. In addition, there is widespread dissatisfaction with the delayed response of the South African authorities in investigating and addressing these reports of ill-treatment, and continued allegations of possible collusion and involvement of some elements of the security forces in the ongoing violence increase the mistrust of the police and security forces felt by the majority of South Africans. It is urgently necessary, therefore, that the police and defence forces of South Africa be reminded of their primary, sacred duty to protect the life, security and dignity of all South Africans in all of South Africa. They must simply cease to be stalwarts of the apartheid order if justice is ever to be established as the norm of South African society. The retraining and reorientation of the police, security and defence forces are by general admission an essential requirement for a transition to a successful and non-racial constitutional democracy in South Africa. The Special Committee welcomes in this connection the independent assessment of the functioning and conduct of police and security personnel currently being conducted by the Goldstone Commission. We consider it essential, and regard the recent decision by the South African authorities to allow the International Committee of the Red Cross access to police stations as a step in the right direction. At a meeting held on 12 October 1992, in observance of the Day of Solidarity with South African Political Prisoners, the Special Committee organized a round-table discussion on "The role of law enforcement and law enforcement officials during the transition period". Experts from within and outside South Africa examined, inter alia, the present internal security set-up in South Africa, the role of law enforcement agents in the maintenance of law and order, their attitude to opponents of apartheid and general respect for human rights. Recommendations made by these experts are being summarized and will be widely disseminated. (Mr. Gambari. Chairman. Special Committee against Apartheid) The Special Committee is grateful to the Committee of Trustees of the United Nations Trust Fund for South Africa for its support for voluntary agencies inside South Africa that are not only rendering humanitarian and legal assistance to victims of apartheid and ensuring effective implementation of legislation repealing apartheid laws but also encouraging increased public confidence in the rule of law. It is of the utmost importance that following or in tandem with progress in the negotiation process, a new approach should be devised by the United Nations with a view to helping to address the socio-economic imbalances in South Africa, thus inducing in due course a growth process that will be capable of sustaining a widening of services, human-resources development and economic participation not by some but by all of the people of South Africa. A United Nations seminar organized by the Special Committee and held at Windhoek in May of this year demonstrated the will of the international community to help address the socio-economic problems facing South Africa. As the socio-economic dimensions of South Africa's transformation into a new society are coming into focus with increasing urgency, the Special Committee stands ready, in cooperation with United Nations specialized agencies and others, to focus international attention on the requirements of the disadvantaged sectors in South Africa and to promote appropriate and coordinated responses by the international community. One critical problem crying out for help is that of the needs of young people in South Africa. In two decades the children and youth of the townships have come to be equal partners with the adults in the struggle against apartheid. They shouldered that responsibility with courage and dedication at great risk to themselves and often with loss of life among them. The burden of responsibility they so bravely took upon themselves was far above and beyond their age. Most of those young people have grown up knowing only poverty and deprivation. The future appears bleak to them in the light of the violence, the decay and the levels of unemployment they see in their communities. Their defiance of authority relates directly to the hopelessness of their lives. Some refer to them as "the lost generation". But they represent the future, and because of that it is essential that their hopes should be rekindled and kept alive and that their dedication and commitment should be channelled positively for the greater good of the country through specialized training programmes, empowerment and job placement. It is indeed necessary that a culture of learning should be restored in the townships. International educational assistance to disadvantaged South Africans during the transition period is of critical importance. In this regard, the Special Committee notes with appreciation the important contribution being made by the United Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa (UNETPSA) in the fields of education, training and human-resources development in South Africa. Under the able leadership of Ambassador Huslid of Norway, the Programme has rapidly and efficiently adjusted its efforts and projects to the priority needs of disadvantaged South Africans during this important transitional period. It will, of course, be many years before the scars and legacy of apartheid begin to fade. The glaring disparities in the socio-economic sectors are a daily reminder that past suffering and deprivation continue to be pai t of the present even as a deeply divided country strives to move forward towards a common future and a shared vision of a non-racial constitutional democracy in South Africa. The Special Committee believes that the international community can help to create stable conditions for the rapid and peaceful attainment of a new South Africa based on a negotiated, democratic and non-racial constitution by providing appropriate material, financial and other assistance to South Africans in their efforts to address the many serious socio-economic problems, particularly in the areas of human-resources development and employment, health and housing. The 1992 report of the Special Committee against Apartheid to the General Assembly seeks to give a fair description of the developments on the ground in South Africa that I have touched on, and it provides a set of recommendations that the Committee hopes will find resonance and support on a consensus basis in the General Assembly. The 1989 consensus Declaration on apartheid called inter alia for negotiations in a climate free of violence. The Special Committee's recommendations include a reiteration of strong support for the peaceful negotiation process in South Africa and also contain an exhortation addressed to the representatives of the people of South Africa to resume, without further delay, broad-based negotiations on transitional arrangements and basic principles for a process of reaching agreement on a new constitution and for its speedy entry into force. To promote a climate conducive to negotiations the Special Committee, recommends inter alia (A/47/22, para. 181) that the General Assembly should urge the South African authorities to exercise fi lly and impartially the primary responsibility of every government: to put an end to violence, to protect the lives, security and property of all isuth Africans in all of South Africa and to bring to justice those responsible, and also to assume fully the them. The burden of responsibility they so bravely took upon themselves was far above and beyond their age. Most of those young people have grown up knowing only poverty and deprivation. The future appears bleak to them in the light of the violence, the decay and the levels of unemployment they see in their communities. Their defiance of authority relates directly to the hopelessness of their lives. Some refer to them as "the lost generation". But they represent the future, and because of that it is essential that their hopes should be rekindled and kept alive and that their dedication and commitment should be channelled positively for the greater good of the country through specialized training programmes, empowerment and job placement. It is indeed necessary that a culture of learning should be restored in the townships. International educational assistance to disadvantaged South Africans during the transition period is of critical importance. In this regard, the Special Committee notes with appreciation the important contribution being made by the United Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa (UNETPSA) in the fields of education, training and human-resources development in South Africa. Under the able leadership of Ambassador Huslid of Norway, the Programme has rapidly and efficiently adjusted its efforts and projects to the priority needs of disadvantaged South Africans during this important transitional period. It will, of course, be many years before the scars and legacy of apartheid begin to fade. The glaring disparities in the socio-economic sectors are a daily reminder that past suffering and deprivation continue to be pai t of the present even as a deeply divided country strives to move forward towards a common future and a shared vision of a non-racial constitutional democracy in South Africa. The Special Committee believes that the international community can help to create stable conditions for the rapid and peaceful attainment of a new South Africa based on a negotiated, democratic and non-racial constitution by providing appropriate material, financial and other assistance to South Africans in their efforts to address the many serious socio-economic problems, particularly in the areas of human-resources development and employment, health and housing. The 1992 report of the Special Committee against Apartheid to the General Assembly seeks to give a fair description of the developments on the ground in South Africa that I have touched on, and it provides a set of recommendations that the Committee hopes will find resonance and support on a consensus basis in the General Assembly. The 1989 consensus Declaration on apartheid called inter alia for negotiations in a climate free of violence. The Special Committee's recommendations include a reiteration of strong support for the peaceful negotiation process in South Africa and also contain an exhortation addressed to the representatives of the people of South Africa to resume, without further delay, broad-based negotiations on transitional arrangements and basic principles for a process of reaching agreement on a new constitution and for its speedy entry into force. To promote a climate conducive to negotiations the Special Committee, recommends inter alia (A/47/22, para. 181) that the General Assembly should urge the South African authorities to exercise filly and impartially the primary responsibility of every government: to put an end to violence, to protect the lives, security and property of all Lrmth Africans in all of South Africa and to bring to justice those responsible, and also to assume fully the responsibility to respect and protect the right of South Africans to demonstrate peacefully in public in order to convey their views effectively. In this context, the Special Committee also recommends the General Assembly to call upon the signatories to the National Peace Accord to recommit themselves to the process of peaceful change by fully and effectively implementing its provisions and by cooperating with each other to that end, and upon all parties in South Africa to refrain from any further acts of violence. The Secretary-General's report of 7 August 1992 to the Security Council and his most recent report of 6 November 1992 to the General Assembly (A/47/574) on the progress made so far in the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on South Africa provide us with enlightened guidelines for an effective international response in assisting South Africa during this difficult transitional period. They include a call for greater functional coordination by the United Nations system so as to enable it to intervene as one and assist more effectively in promoting a climate of peace, mutual respect and tolerance in which human rights are respected, so that the negotiating process may develop a new and decisive momentum towards a negotiated settlement of the conflict in South Africa. It will also be necessary for the United Nations to consider assisting the people of South Africa in an electoral process that will lead to a non-racial, democratic country. As the historic consensus Declaration on South Africa clearly states, apartheid will have been eradicated only when a non-racial constitution has been adopted and a new Government has been elected as a result of free and fair elections under that constitution. The immediate upcoming task of reaching agreement on a broad negotiating forum and on the modalities regarding transitional arrangements are the responsibility primarily of the political parties concerned. It is therefore incumbent on those political parties to draw on their wisdom and foresight, to transcend any possible differences between them and to focus on a common platform and common arrangements that should enable all South Africans to live side by side in peace, freedom and justice and to work together to build the bright future which should be theirs by right. One thing is certain: no time should be wasted in resuming the negotiation process among all parties. Just as domestic peace and a new non-racial constitutional order are the necessary requirements for the economic and social uplifting of all, there can be no lasting and viable democracy without a sound economy and a stable society. By way of conclusion, it can be said that nowhere in Africa today are the stakes for peace so high as they are in South Africa. Whatever the difficulties, let us renew our resolve that the transition to a non-racial, democratic society in South Africa should not be allowed to fail. What is clear in the immediate future is that any further delay in bringing about a political settlement could be disastrous. The opportunity for such a settlement that generations of South Africans have made possible through their struggles and their suffering, with unswerving support from the United Nations, surely must not be missed. This is not the time for any Member State or any group of Member States of the United Nations to equivocate, to show fatigue or prematurely to declare that apartheid is dead and therefore concerted international action against the evils of apartheid is no longer necessary. On the contrary, as the people of South Africa continue to march towards the dawn of a new era, they will continue to need and I hope they will continue to receive the support, certainly, of the Special Committee against Apartheid and that of the United Nations as a whole. The democratic forces in South Africa are not fighting alone: the anti-apartheid struggle is a collective struggle of the entire international community. Together we shall overcome and I hope sooner rather than later.

I now request the Rapporteur of the Special Committee against Apartheid to introduce the Special Committee's report. Mr. GOEL (India), Rapporteur of the Special Committee against Apartheid: I have the privilege and the honour to present to the General Assembly the report of the Special Committee against Apartheid contained in document A/47/22. This report, whose contents represent the consensus views of the Special Committee against Apartheid, was adopted by the Committee at a formal meeting on 4 November 1992. The report consists of two parts and three annexes. Part one consists of seven sections, namely: Introduction; Political developments in South Africa; Socio-economic situation in South Africa; External relations of South Africa; International response to developments in South Africa; Review of the work of the Special Committee; and Conclusions and recommendations. A wide range of sources has been used in the preparation of the report, including statements of the Special Committee against Apartheid and of Governments, statistics from various international sources, research publications, periodicals and newspapers. The objective of the report is to present the developments regarding South Africa during the period covered by it on the basis of information available from various sources, and to arrive at a set of conclusions and recommendations that deal with the remaining problems in South Africa and support the process of negotiation towards establishment of a democratic, non-racial and united South Africa, as called for in the Declaration on Apartheid and its Destructive Consequences in Southern Africa. That Declaration was adopted by consensus by the General Assembly on 14 December 1989, at its sixteenth special session. Footnotes are therefore extensively provided in the report to indicate the source of the information. The section on political developments in South Africa includes the following subsections. First, there is a subsection on the peaceful negotiation process, which the Special Committee considers essential to achieve a speedy end to apartheid. Included in this subsection is the participation of the two United Nations delegations appointed by the Secretary-General as observer to the first and second plenary sessions of the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA I and CODESA II), respectively under the leadership of the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid and the Permanent Representative of India, another member of the Special Committee. The second subsection deals with violence, which has continued to affect the majority of the South African population adversely and cast its dark shadow on the process of negotiation for a political settlement, and which the Special Committee has assiduously criticized. For this reason, violence is a part of the subsection on outstanding issues and their impact on political settlement. Lastly, the subsection on prospects for the process of negotiation deals with positive contacts to pave the way for further negotiations in South Africa, particularly, between the liberation movements and the Government, which the Special Committee considers crucially important. Section III describes the socio-economic situation in South Africa and has two subsections, namely, Economic performance and Socio-economic inequalities. The first subsection gives a picture of the economic developments in South Africa during the period under review; the second describes in some detail the serious problems faced by the black majority of South Africa in such critical socio-economic sectors as health, education, housing and employment and discusses the lack of productive economic opportunities. Section IV on external relations of South Africa describes in a factual manner South Africa's relations with the international community, including those in the area of trade, its defence cooperation, and its imports and exports of arms and equipment, as well as other relevant military-related and nuclear issues. Section V takes up the international response to developments in South Africa, giving a full account of action taken by the United Nations, including: the Security Council meetings of 15 and 16 July, in which members of the Special Committee actively participated, and which were held in order to discuss the question of violence in South Africa and the need to resume the process of negotiations in the aftermath of the Boipatong massacre; and the appointment of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for South Africa, as well as his report containing his findings. This section also includes a brief summary of activities of intergovernmental, non-governmental and other organizations and of Governments. Section VI reviews the work of the Special Committee during the period of the report. Activities of the Special Committee are described in detail in this section, including the Special Committee's assessment of and response to political developments in South Africa. This section includes a brief description of the important seminar on socio-economic problems in South Africa organized by the Committee in Windhoek, as well as the hearings on the phenomenon of political violence in South Africa organized in London. Section VII contains the Special Committee's conclusions and recommendations, the essence of which is to call for continuing encouragement and support by the international community with a view to promoting the process of negotiation in South Africa in a climate free of violence, within the broad framework of the Declaration on apartheid, and which address the need for the international community to seek an appropriate approach to address the serious problems of socio-economic inequalities in South Africa. Part two of the report has been prepared in accordance with resolution 46/79 D, and contains factual information on recent developments concerning relations between South Africa and Israel. It has four sections, namely, Introduction, Military and nuclear collaboration, Other aspects of the collaboration, and Conclusions and recommendations. We have tried to make our report brief and factual and have succeeded. On behalf of the Special Committee and its drafting group, as well as on my own behalf, I should like to extend to the Secretariat our warm appreciation and heartfelt gratitude for the most extensive cooperation provided by it in the preparation of this report. This report in fact would not have been possible but for that cooperation, which extended to the preparation of the first draft and included assistance by way of information and suggestions throughout the finalization of the text. I must also thank the members of the drafting group Ghana, Nepal, Ukraine, Zimbabwe, Algeria, Sudan and the Syrian Arab Republic as well as the observers of the African National Congress and the Pan African Congress of Azania who assisted the drafting group in all stages of its work. The report has benefited immeasurably from their contributions and reflects the consensus of the group to a large extent because of the valuable and valid suggestions they offered from time to time. Lastly, but most importantly, I wish to express my personal appreciation to the Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid, His Excellency Ambassador Ibrahim Gambari, the Permanent Representative of Nigeria to the United Nations, for his wisdom in guiding the Special Committee in its work and for his unwavering support during the preparation of the report.

I now call upon the Chairman of the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa. Mr. NYAKYI (United Republic of Tanzania), Chairman of the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa: I am delighted to have this opportunity to address the General Assembly in my capacity as Chairman of the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa. As in the past, the report called for by the General Assembly last year in resolution 46/79 E will be presented by the Rapporteur. My purpose is to review the work of the Intergovernmental Group for the past year to enable the Assembly to understand and appreciate the environment and background against which the Group carried out its mandate as the Assembly considers the Group's work for the coming year. In the resolution to which I have just referred, the General Assembly at its forty-sixth session mandated the Intergovernmental Group to continue to monitor the supply and shipping of oil and petroleum products to South Africa because it judged that the time envisaged in the Declaration on Apartheid and its Destructive Consequences in Southern Africa for the lifting of the oil embargo had not come. It is a matter of great regret that the Intergovernmental Group feels constrained to make the same recommendation this year. Although a number of positive changes took place in South Africa during the year, the stage of profound and irreversible changes stipulated in the Declaration has not been reached. It is not just that the conditions set out in the Declaration have not been met. In some respects the situation has, in fact, deteriorated. The Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid has already explained in great detail the setback suffered by the negotiating process this past year and the reasons for the impasse. I need only stress here, for our purpose, that it is the same reasons that have compelled the Intergovernmental Group to seek the renewal of its mandate for the coming year. This year, as in the past, the Intergovernmental Group continued to rely on the cooperation of Member States and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations in the discharge of its mandate. It continued to seek to reach decisions by consensus. The Intergovernmental Group has always felt that the voluntary nature of the embargo calls for decision-making by consensus. While that approach has the obvious advantage that, once agreed, decisions are guaranteed the support of all members of the Group, it has the disadvantage that a single member can stop movement on an issue if it feels strongly (Mr. Nyakyir Chairman. Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa) enough to exercise a veto. Despite that shortcoming, we believe that the advantages of the procedure outweigh the disadvantages, and we intend to stay with it. As in previous years, developments in South Africa continued to impact on the work of the Intergovernmental Group. In the main, developments over the past year impacted negatively on the mandate of the Group. Some Member States saw the improvement in the prospects for a negotiated end to apartheid and for the resolution of the other conflicts in the region as providing a reason for the lifting of the oil embargo. For example, on 6 April 1992 at its meeting in Luxembourg the Council of Ministers of the European Community decided to lift its seven-year-old ban on the export of oil to South Africa on the grounds that the positive developments in South Africa within the framework of the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA) needed to be rewarded by the lifting of sanctions. The Intergovernmental Group could not share that assessment. Concerned by the effect that this premature lifting of sanctions could have on the mandate of the Group, I issued a statement on 16 April 1992 and followed it up with a letter to the European Community appealing to its member States to maintain the ban. The collapse of the CODESA process in May, only weeks after the Luxembourg decision, and the escalating violence cast serious doubts on the judgement of the European Community and other States that have lifted the oil embargo. A very important value of the United Nations Declaration on apartheid is the fact that it is a consensus document. It embodies principles, purposes and objectives that we all share. Furthermore, it has set out an agreed strategy to be followed for the peaceful eradication of apartheid. Specifically, it has laid down a two-pronged strategy of a careful balance of pressure and encouragement to induce positive change in South Africa. For the document to retain its value as the international community's blueprint for the eradication of apartheid, it is vitally important that this consensus be maintained at all stages. Unilateral interpretations of the Declaration of the kind to which I have referred are certain to undermine the consensus and, consequently, the negotiating process. In relation to the oil embargo the Intergovernmental Group has long taken the view that the point of profound and irreversible change at which the ban can be lifted can be deemed to have been reached when a transitional authority and a democratically elected constituent assembly are in place and an agreed constitution has been drawn up. We commend this view to the General Assembly. Of course, if the majority of the people of South Africa or their acknowledged representatives feel that an earlier date will advance their cause, it will be our duty and our pleasure to support them. The effectiveness of the Group's work has continued to reside in the cooperation of Member States. This year, cooperation from Member States, or lack of it, has remained at more or less the same level as last year. Those States that extended cooperation in the past continued to do so this year, while those that withheld their cooperation and support persisted in that attitude during the year. Expectations of imminent change in South Africa also appear to have influenced the reception given the model law commended to Member States by the Intergovernmental Group. Very few States have reacted to the communication from the Group. I conclude from this that a number of States do not see the need to review their legislation because they sense change on the horizon. The stalemate reached in the negotiations is, of course, evidence that that perception is wrong. In addition, it sends the wrong message to Pretoria, which needs every incentive to negotiate seriously. The voluntary nature of the embargo would suggest that Member States would need no incentive to extend their cooperation to the Intergovernmental Group. Sadly, this has not been the case with a number of important Member States, many of them oil-shipping States. They have never bothered to reply to the Group's communications, which has tended to undermine the effectiveness of the embargo. For many of these States, their support for the voluntary embargo remains simply declaratory. Because of their withholding cooperation from the Group, while failing to maintain an effective embargo by vigorously monitoring it and taking action against its violators, the Group can find little to say in their favour. A careful reading of the report of the Special Committee against Apartheid permits only one conclusion. It is that in various ways the Pretoria regime has failed to live up to the expectations of the majority population of South Africa and the world community in regard to its obligations under the Declaration. It has also failed to live up to its responsibilities as the guardian and protector of the security of its citizens and their property. Specifically, it has failed to satisfy some of the conditions necessary to create a climate conducive to negotiations. It has not, for example, released all the political prisoners. Instead it has continued to use those who are still incarcerated for their opposition to apartheid as bargaining chips to pursue the white-minority and National Party political agenda. It has retained on the statute book some security legislation that restricts free and peaceful political activity. Above all, it has refused to assume its responsibility for ending the tragic violence that continues to plague the country, resulting in the loss of more than 8,000 lives over the last two years, according to most accounts, including those compiled by the Government itself, the Human Rights Commission and the anti-apartheid forces in the country. The gravity of the unremitting violence was brought home to the world community by the collapse of the CODESA negotiation progress in May. Even President F. W. de Klerk now acknowledges that serious negotiations are impossible to conduct in the present atmosphere of escalating violence. On 9 September 1992 he stated that it was "simply not possible to negotiate constitutional issues before the issues of violence had been dealt with satisfactorily". The international community has tolerated the perpetration of violence in South Africa for too long. It is a sad commentary on the conscience of humanity that it took the barbarity of Boipatong and Bisho to shake and awaken the conscience of the world community into action. We welcome the fact that, through Security Council resolutions 765 (1992) and 772 (1992), the international community has now assumed responsibility towards helping put an end to the violence and the resulting carnage. All of us have a responsibility to lend full support to the efforts of the Secretary-General to implement Security Council resolution 772 (1992). The international community now has an opportunity to make up for past neglect. The deployment of external monitors in South Africa, consequent upon Security Council resolution 772 (1992), is the single most important development likely to contribute towards the ending of the violence and the restoration of mutual trust and confidence, which are vitally necessary for the resumption of the negotiating process. It goes without saying that to be able to perform this function effectively and efficiently the external presence must be deployed in adequate numbers. If the international community has learned one useful lesson from its long campaign for the eradication of apartheid it is that the minority regime will only move under pressure. Developments over the past year fully justify the decision of the forty-sixth session of the General Assembly to retain the oil embargo. Pretoria's failure to negotiate in good faith; its refusal to take effective measures to end the violence, not to mention the mounting evidence of complicity in it by elements of its security forces; its failure to implement in full the conditions set out in the United Nations Declaration for the creation of a climate conducive to negotiations - all of these argue for the need to maintain existing pressures on the regime, including the oil embargo. As already stated, the critical point at which sanctions can be lifted, where, in the words of the Declaration the changes can be described as "profound and irreversible", is yet to be reached. Again, to repeat a widely shared consensus, when an agreed transitional or interim authority and a democratically elected Constituent Assembly are in place and a new Constitution for South Africa has been agreed, that point can be said to have been reached. Until then, existing measures, including especially the oil and arms embargoes, must be maintained. It is true that the oil embargo has never been able to deny Pretoria the oil it needed. But there is no doubt that by raising the cost of violation for the regime and its colaborators the embargo has made some contribution to the achievement of the objective. That objective was and remains to bring about the eradication of apartheid and the establishment of a united democratic and non-racial South Africa. In conclusion I wish to thank all those Member States that have extended their cooperation to the Intergovernmental Group over the past year and to express the Group's hope that their cooperation will continue until the objectives of the embargo have been achieved. To those that up till now have witheld their support and cooperation from the Group, I want to express the hope that even at this hour they will find it possible to join the vast majority of the membership of our Organization in maintaining what is, after all, a voluntary embargo. If they still cannot, then the very least we expect of them is that they refrain from frustrating the efforts of those who are determined to maintain the embargo. Finally, I want to thank the staff of the Centre against Apartheid for the efficient and dedicated service they have continued to render to the Group. To say that without their support it would not have been possible for the Group to accomplish its mandate is to understate the value of their contribution to our work.

I now call on the Chairman of the Advisory Committee of the United Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa, His Excellency Mr. Martin Huslid of Norway, who will introduce draft resolution A/47/L.15 in the course of his statement. United Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa: In my capacity as Chairman of the Advisory Committee on the United Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa (UNETPSA), I am pleased to make some introductory comments regarding the draft resolution contained in document A/47/L.15. I have been informed that since the draft resolution was printed quite a number of additional countries have indicated that they wish to co-sponsor it. So far, these countries are: Austria, Brazil, Chile, Congo, Costa Rica, Guyana, Japan, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea and Tunisia. With the original countries and these additional ones, we have this year - as in the past - a wide range of sponsors from all parts of the world for our draft resolution, and that gives us great satisfaction. Since its inception in 1967 the United Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa has served as a concrete manifestation of the long-standing commitment of the United Nations to the education and training of disadvantaged young people from southern Africa. Since that time UNETPSA has offered a broad spectrum of educational and training programmes ranging from secondary schooling to doctoral-level study in a variety of fields, including technical and vocational training. In recent years the Programme has enabled students from the region, in particular South Africans and Namibians, to obtain professional training and expertise in areas that until recently were closed to them. During the past 25 years the Programme has received more than 36,000 scholarship applications, and more than 8,500 students have completed their studies in a broad variety of fields in more than 30 countries. The Programme not only has benefited the students trained under its auspices, but also has made a valuable contribution to the newly independent countries of the region. Currently some 2,108 students are pursuing their studies and training under the sponsorship of the Programme. Almost 80 per cent of these are South Africans and about 20 per cent are Namibians. They are pursuing their training in a variety of fields, which include agriculture, economics, business administration, computer science, engineering, and medicine and law, as well as remedial, vocational and technical training. During the period under review 321 Namibian students have continued their education and training under the aegis of the Programme. As I reported to the General Assembly at its forty-sixth session, in consultation with the Namibian authorities the Programme will continue to sponsor those Namibian students who will still be on board by 31 December 1992 until the completion of their courses of training for which awards were granted. We can draw a measure of satisfaction from the fact that many of the hundreds of Namibians who received training in key disciplines have returned to their country and have taken up important positions in various sectors of Namibia's economy in building its infrastructure, in social services, in education and health as well as in government and the private sector. Contributions to the Programme for the period from 1 September 1991 to 31 August 1992, which totalled more than $5.4 million, represent a decrease compared to the $5.9 million in contributions during the previous year. This decrease in income of about 10 per cent is of course to be regretted. However, I am pleased to report that despite this decline in resources, the number of students sponsored rose, as I mentioned earlier, to 2,108 as compared to 1,278 last year, largely on account of more effective resource allocation and a greater number of cost-sharing arrangements with educational institutions and organizations in low-cost countries, including South Africa itself, which is now the main focus of the Programme's activities. As requested by General Assembly resolution 46/80 of 13 December 1991, the Programme was able, for the first time since it was established in 1967, to initiate educational and training programmes inside the country during the course of this year. This is a very satisfactory development. The Programme's work plan for the 1992 to 1993 period reflects the adjustments made in terms of the priority fields of education and training, cost-effective allocation of resources and placement of students. As circumstances change in South Africa, the focus of the Programme will be increasingly on educational and training projects inside South Africa. An amount of $3 million has been allocated for this purpose in the work plan for 1992 to 1993. The Programme will continue, however, to allocate some of its funds to enable South Africans to obtain training abroad in high technology and other specialized fields, which is not readily available in South Africa. UNETPSA's projects both inside South Africa and abroad aim at strengthening the institutional capacity of the historically black and other universities as well as vocational institutions and non-governmental organizations which serve the educational and training needs of disadvantaged South Africans. The Programme is likewise co-sponsoring projects to provide training in black leadership skills so as to facilitate the transition to a non-racial and democratic South Africa. The training of black lawyers, judges and administrators for the effective administration of justice in a post-apartheid society and the provision of post-graduate and short-term specialized training abroad in high-technology fields not readily available in South Africa continue to be of major concern to the Programme. In order to enhance job placement for its graduates, UNETPSA is paying close attention to strengthening linkages between its training activities and private industry in South Africa. In recent months the Programme has concluded cooperative and co-sponsorship arrangements with several universities and educational institutions in South Africa and has been able to place a large number of students in educational institutions offering training in priority fields such as biotechnology, computers, community development, education, environmental studies, agriculture, engineering, science, business and health care. In addition, the Programme has also co-sponsored the advanced training of junior faculty in the fields of science, engineering and agriculture as well as the training of lawyers within the country. The returnability and employability of graduates assumed a special importance this past year as several hundred South African exiles returned to their country within the framework of the agreement entered into by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the South African authorities on 4 September 1991. These returning exiles included a large number of persons who have completed their education and training under the auspices of the Programme. The returnability and employability of graduates are now considered to be basic criteria in the granting of new awards abroad. The Programme is also striving to ensure that the fields of study and training are geared to meet the current and prospective manpower needs of South Africa. It was in this context that the Programme convened a Follow-up Conference on International Educational Assistance to Disadvantaged South Africans here at Headquarters on 8 and 9 September this year. Some 133 participants, including South African experts on education and human-resource development, and representatives of donor countries, non-governmental organizations, specialized agencies and the national liberation movements, attended the Conference. The aim of the Conference was to focus international attention on the crisis in education, the tremendous needs in the education and training sectors in South Africa and on ways and means for the international community to assist in addressing those needs. The experts present at the Conference exchanged views on priority areas in which short- and long-term intervention by bilateral and multilateral educational and training programmes was needed, and they emphasized the need for mechanisms for the coordination of assistance by multilateral and bilateral assistance programmes. The Conference increased our understanding of both the needs and the preferred channels of assistance that would ensure the required structural changes in the education system in South Africa and offer broader educational and training opportunities for disadvantaged students. I believe there is a need for a continuous dialogue with South African educators, experts and representatives on these critical issues, which will require assistance over a long period of time. Participants in the Follow-up Conference underlined priority areas for which international financial and technical assistance was needed. These included capacity-building of Black universities, tertiary education, basic adult education and capacity-building and decision-making of non-governmental organizations, community-based organizations and educational institutions which serve the needs and interests of disadvantaged South Africans. Participants in the Conference were of the view that the United Nations and its agencies could facilitate coordination between relevant South African education institutions and non-governmental organizations, aid agencies and international donors. They underlined the need for improved coordination between donors and recipient organizations, both inside and outside South Africa, in terms of agreed priorities and sustainability of programmes and projects undertaken. They also considered it important that a forum on education be organized inside South Africa in due course. The education crisis and the difficulties faced by disadvantaged students and institutions in South Africa are a sad heritage of apartheid and are likely to persist for many years after the formal apartheid system is abolished. I am afraid that my colleague Ambassador Gambari of Nigeria, whom I thank for his kind words, is right when he states that it will take many years before the scars of apartheid fade away. This is probably particularly true when we talk about education. With this background, UNETPSA looks forward to continuing to work with Governments and intergovernmental and non-governmental agencies that have similar assistance programmes to help bridge the great economic and social disparities resulting from decades of apartheid in South Africa. In this regard, I should like to express appreciation to those Member States, organizations and institutions which have provided assistance and training to South African and Namibian students sponsored by the Programme, in addition to contributing generously to bilateral programmes of assistance. It should be pointed out at this crucial juncture in South Africa that continued assistance by the international community is much needed. On behalf of the Programme, I therefore once again ask for the support of Member States to enable UNETPSA to meet the continually growing demand for education and training opportunities for disadvantaged South Africans in South Africa and abroad. In regard to their difficult situation, some representatives may have noticed a rather illuminating but sad article in The New York Times on 7 November, headed "For Blacks, Slightly More Equal Still Means Failure". Permit me, particularly on behalf of the Advisory Committee, to express our appreciation of the valuable support and assistance given to the Programme by the Secretary-General. Our thanks also go to Mr. Johan Nordenfelt, Director of the Centre against Apartheid, and his staff and to the Fellowship Service of the Department of Economic and Social Development. Finally, particular appreciation should be expressed to the manager of the Programme, Mr. Abdennour Abrous. At a time when South Africa is going through a difficult transition to a post-apartheid democratic and non-racial society, international assistance can, I believe, make a significant contribution to the development of South Africa's most valuable resource its young people by enabling them to acquire the necessary skills and education. In this regard, a continued commitment by the international community would go a long way in providing equal opportunities for large numbers of South Africans to better their lives, a goal which they deserve to reach without any further delay. In this spirit, I appeal to the General Assembly to adopt unanimously the draft resolution.

I now call on the Chairman of the Commission against Apartheid in Sports. in Sports: I have the honour to introduce to the Assembly the report of the Commission against Apartheid in Sports, contained in document A/47/45. There are some who mistakenly, in the view of the Commission, have been voicing their conviction that the International Convention against Apartheid in Sports has outlived its usefulness. On the contrary, our recent meeting has established quite clearly that the Commission still has an essential role to play in joint international efforts to ensure the elimination of apartheid from sports and from society in general in South Africa. The representatives of the African National Congress, the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania and non-racial sports organizations from within South Africa participated in our session for 1992 and stressed the need further to explore proposals to enhance world-wide support for non-racial sport in South Africa by providing moral and material assistance. Recent events regarding sports contacts with South Africa clearly demonstrate that the international community should be cautious and careful in its response to events in that country. Apartheid continues to exist while the present constitution is in force. The practices of apartheid have yet to be totally eliminated. The stage has not yet been reached that would justify the abandonment of the machinery which the international community has so painstakingly put in place. As long as the system of apartheid is a reality in South Africa, there will be a need for the application of international pressure. The Commission also considers it essential that machinery to monitor the process of integration of sports in South Africa should be kept in place until the system of apartheid has been dismantled. That would be in accordance with article 10.5, of the Convention, which specifies that "The provisions of the present article relating specifically to South Africa shall cease to apply when the system of apartheid is abolished in that country." The Commission's report this year refers to many important issues. First of all is the issue of the status of the International Convention against Apartheid in Sports itself. The Commission wishes to confirm that the Convention is still applicable to the situation in South Africa. The process of change in South Africa is still at a very delicate stage. Non-racial sportsmen and sportswomen in South Africa are still disadvantaged and organized sports is still far from being totally integrated. While highlighting the importance of the International Convention, the Commission wishes to underscore the problems relating to the implementation of the Convention which stem mainly from the failure of many States Parties to meet their financial obligations and/or to submit their reports in accordance with article 12.1. Taking into consideration informal indications from States Parties that further guidance on the format for reports would be welcome, the Commission has decided to present a questionnaire, contained in annex V of the report, which will be communicated to the States Parties to facilitate the preparation of reports under article 12.1. The questionnaire emphasizes the importance of information on technical and material assistance to non-racial sports in South Africa as a means of expediting the total integration of all sporting disciplines in South Africa on a non-racial basis and the elimination of apartheid from sports and society. The report consists of six chapters and five annexes. The introduction contains a review of the work of the Commission and other developments concerning apartheid in sports, while chapter II deals with progress towards integration and the elimination of racism from sports in South Africa. This is one of the major tasks of the Commission, and we were grateful to the representatives of the liberation movements and non-racial sporting organizations from South Africa who provided the Commission with first-hand information in this regard. The Commission also considered as a positive step the decision of the International Olympic Committee to admit the National Olympic Committee of South Africa (NOCSA), which is organized on a non-racial basis. However, the Commission also cautioned that any attempt by persons or organizations advocating apartheid to gain control of NOCSA must be met by firm action by the international sports community. I commend the recommendations of the report of the Commission for endorsement by the General Assembly. The Commission invites States which have signed the International Convention but have not ratified it to do so and those States which have not signed to consider acceding to it. The Commission urges States Parties to submit their reports under article 12.1 of the Convention. We hope that the new questionnaire which is annexed to the report and which I have been authorized to circulate to States Parties will assist by providing guidance for the preparation of reports. The Commission's recommendations also call upon States, organizations and individuals to provide moral and material support to non-racial sports organizations in South Africa. In this respect I would like also to put on record our appreciation for the cooperation and support extended to the Commission by the Special Committee against Apartheid. The untiring efforts of that Committee over the years have been applauded by the Commission, and we exhort its Chairman and members to stay the course. As for staying the course, we can all learn lessons from two gripping moments from the Olympic Games held during the summer in Barcelona. I think we will always remember that young woman who seemed so sure of winning that the announcer had already conceded her the gold medal until, unfortunately, she tripped on the last hurdle and fell but still had the spirit to crawl across the finishing line in fifth place. Then there was the young man who, having sustained an injury, pulled up, but hobbled to finish the race. Both of these athletes showed the indomitable will to reach their goal. The former's mishap shows that however close we are to the end, and however far ahead we seem to be, we must first clear all the hurdles. It behoves the international community to follow their example and, through a combination of cooperation, incentives, monitoring and pressure, to continue striving to expedite the demise of the system of apartheid.

I now call on the Rapporteur of the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa. Mr. FIFE (Norway), Rapporteur of the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa: I have the honour, as Rapporteur of the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa, to introduce the report of the Group in accordance with General Assembly resolution 46/79 E. I should like to commend the Chairman of the Group, Ambassador Anthony Nyakyi, as well as the Chair of the Drafting Group on the report, Ms. Nabeela Al-Mulla, and the other members of the Group for their work. The Secretariat should also be thanked for its valuable support throughout this process. The report acknowledges that rapid political developments have continued to take place in South Africa in the period covered. It underlines the fact that, in spite of positive developments, not all the objectives of the Declaration on Apartheid and its Destructive Consequences in Southern Africa of December 1989 have been attained. Measures adopted by States, and in particular the oil embargo, should therefore be maintained until profound and irreversible changes have taken place in South Ai.-ica. When making an assessment of those changes, Member States should keep in mind the objectives of the Declaration, which include the establishment of a united, democratic and non-racial South Africa through the adoption of a new constitutional order. The report's structure consists of four main chapters and four annexes. The introduction gives an outline of the general political framework for the oil embargo. It also describes salient aspects of the Group's work in carrying out its mandate. This includes the participation of the liberation movements of South Africa in the Group's meetings and the cooperation extended by intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations. The Group has again devoted particular attention to an assessment of the status of the oil embargo againt South Africa. The embargo is a voluntary measure adopted by Member States on the recommendation of the General Assembly. Despite support for resolutions on this subject from a broad majority in the Assembly, some Governments have reconsidered their legislation on the supply of oil and petroleum products to South Africa. The Group believes, however, that it would be premature to lift the embargo. The following chapter of the report describe the various monitoring activities of the Group. The most important of these is the consideration of alleged violations of the embargo. With a view to providing an opportunity for Governments to re-examine old cases, the Group has decided to send reminders concerning such alleged breaches. The replies received so far have not justified closing the cases annexed to the report. The Group has, furthermore, considered tanker calls at South African ports. Those cases that have not been clarified appear in two annexes. The last chapter of the report contains the Group's conclusions and recommendations to the General Assembly. One main observation is that the oil embargo continues to be an important component of the international pressure on South Africa in order to attain the objectives of the United Nations Declaration on Apartheid of 1989. It should therefore be maintained for the time being. States are thus asked to cooperate closely with the Group and to ensure, through legislative and other measures, that the oil embargo is maintained. I recommend that the General Assembly take note of this report and endorse its conclusions. Mr. O'BRIEN (New Zealand): The South African Government's action to remove the statutory bases of apartheid has been a very significant step, in New Zealand's view. The tasks now and they will be hard and long are to deal with the practices and attitudes of apartheid, and to bring equity and true democracy to South Africa based on a non-racial and democratic constitution. Sanctions have played a key role in forcing change in that country, and how they should continue to be applied remain, we believe, important questions for the international community. The political and constitutional talks in 1991 created high expectations of real progress for 1992: it seemed that most major parties in South Africa had come to accept that the consequences of turning the clock back would be unthinkable. It was the pace as well as the character of change that had moved to the centre of the debate. When the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA) talks reached an impasse in May, the momentum was broken. Soon after, in June, the massacre at Boipatong provided tragic evidence of the consequences of political stalemate and the violence which is spurred by it. The brutality of the Ciskei killings was further proof. These were terrible months of acrimony and violence. The light at the end of the tunnel is that there are now faltering but promising signs that the negotiating process may be getting back on track. But time is being lost. Despite the positive developments, which must be acknowledged, the circumstances of South Africa's black people have changed very little, if at all, from this time last year. Access to even basic health amenities, let alone to education, is little improved. The consequences of there being an uprooted and dispossessed people are still with us. Political enfranchisement, and a better deal from life, still seem a distant prospect. An economy in grave straits, featuring excessive levels of unemployment, points to the economic as well as the moral bankruptcy of decades of apartheid. Profound change is. New Zealand believes, a matter of the greatest urgency. It remains, too, of deep concern to New Zealand that violence has escalated and that there are continuing reports of involvement in it by the security forces. New Zealand gave full support to United Nations Security Council resolution 772 (1992) of 17 August authorizing the Secretary-General to deploy observers in South Africa as a matter of urgency and inviting the Commonwealth, together with other international organizations, to consider deploying their own observers. A New Zealand representative is now in South Africa with the Commonwealth observer group established in October in coordination with the United Nations effort and with the structures set up under the National Peace Accord of September 1991. We reiterate our view that it is incumbent on all parties in South Africa to exercise restraint and to abide by that Accord. Freedom from fear for personal safety is a fundamental human right, and must be present, we think, in any search for political stability and economic progress. The sanctions process has been successful, we believe, in bringing about conditions in South Africa for peaceful, fundamental and irreversible change. It is for the international community to continue to encourage this process and, in all fairness, to respond appropriately to positive achievements as they are made. Striking a balance between sanction and reward remains a challenge to this Organization and to other international organizations and to Member States. It is in this spirit that New Zealand follows the Commonwealth approach of phased management. Such a policy recognizes the vital role that sanctions have played and will continue to play towards the establishment of a non-racial and democratic form of government. It urges restraint as well as commitment to the difficult tasks ahead. It acknowledges results. Phased management, in our view, promotes a positive, not a negative, atmosphere. New Zealand, along with other Commonwealth countries, decided to acknowledge the real progress made in South Africa in 1991 by lifting people-to-people sanctions restricting contact in such areas as tourism, culture and science. This facilitated interaction with democratic anti-apartheid groups in South Africa and demonstrated that the Commonwealth was indeed prepared to respond to positive developments. The Commonwealth has acknowledged progress, as it has occurred, with the racial unification of sport in South Africa. As individual sports have met Commonwealth criteria and been approved in South Africa for renewed international competition, New Zealand has sought to respond. Major events involving the sports of cricket and rugby, for example, have been undertaken within this framework and supported by both the National Olympic and Sports Congress in South Africa and the African National Congress. The world was gratified to welcome a racially integrated South African team back into Olympic competition in Spain this year. However, it is of course absolutely imperative that all South African sports bodies and teams abide strictly by the terms of the integrated South Africa sports authority. This is the clear Commonwealth position, and for its part New Zealand has adhered and will continue to adhere to the rulings of the National Olympic and Sports Congress of South Africa. New Zealand has continued to participate actively as a member of the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa. We continue to recognize the importance of the oil embargo against South Africa as an important element of pressure on the South African Government. At the same time we have maintained all relevant United Nations and Commonwealth sanctions on trade. It is our earnest hope that progress with constitutional negotiations in South Africa will soon reach a point where non-sporting sanctions can be lifted. The past year has seen less movement towards the elimination of the legacy of apartheid than any of us would have wished. But we believe it is clear to everyone in that country that the one policy South Africa can possibly follow, if disaster is to be averted, is that of full democracy. In the longer term, our political concerns with South Africa will be replaced by the difficult job of dealing with the economic, health and educational consequences of apartheid. The victims of apartheid, in their millions, need the support of the international community now, as they will in the future. We hope that that support, given in partnership with a non-racial and democratic Government in South Africa, will be forthcoming in adequate measure. For now, New Zealand itself is looking to increase the educational assistance that it can offer black South Africans. Our efforts in this area began in 1988 with the Mandela scholarships. The aim is to improve human resource development so that all South Africans can take responsibility for developing their country. Following the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Harare in 1991, and a personal appeal by Mr. Mandela, New Zealand reviewed its further assistance to South Africa. In particular, it took account of the priority areas for support and development identified by the Commonwealth Expert Group on Human Resource Development for a Post-Apartheid South Africa. The focus is very much on the practical skills required to fill positions in central and local government. This is one way in which New Zealand hopes it can help lay the foundations for the post-apartheid era. In the meantime, we urge the parties in South Africa, and particularly the South African Government, to speed the transition process. Mr. WISNUMURTI (Indonesia): The General Assembly is taking up the ' question of apartheid at a critical time in South Africa's history. During the past year we have witnessed profound and sweeping changes in the country which cannot but fill us with hope that it is now possible to envisage the final demise of apartheid and the birth of a non-racial society. It was against this backdrop that the Special Committee against Apartheid ! reviewed the political, military, economic and other developments in South Africa. Its report has rightly acknowledged the positive developments that have taken place, most notably the launching of the Convention for a : Democratic South Africa (CODESA) process. In a historic Declaration of Intent, the participants committed themselves to "bring about an undivided South Africa free from apartheid" (A/47/22, para. 6) and to a number of principles that would govern the transition of South Africa from an apartheid to a multi-racial society. Although substantive differences on some of the fundamental issues have remained, CODESA made significant progress on several aspects of transitional arrangements. We were also particularly gratified by the results of the referendum among the white voters, as an encouraging step forward. Subsequently, however, as the report regrettably notes, negotiations have been suspended because of the outbreak of political violence, which has already taken a heavy toll in human lives. My delegation was particularly appalled by the recent gruesome massacre at Biopatong. Of profound concern are the Pretoria regime's ineffectual response to the wanton killing of innocent people and the collusion between its security forces and the perpetrators of violence. These developments have shaken the confidence of the black population in the impartiality of the Government and led to the further exacerbation of tension, suspicion and mistrust. Furthermore, notwithstanding the consideration of this question by the Security Council, violence has persisted, with no end in sight. Faced with interminable delays in the peaceful process already under way, the African National Congress (ANC) and its allies have no alternative but to launch mass action, demonstrations and marches. While the presence of international monitors has contributed to a peaceful situation in many volatile areas of South Africa, it is none the less Pretoria's responsibility to control township violence and to create an atmosphere conducive to the resumption of negotiations. Meanwhile, lack of progress on political and constitutional processes has had an inevitable impact on the present and future economic prospects of South Africa, including its reintegration into the world economy. Prolonged economic deprivation and socio-economic inequities may also threaten to bring South Africa to the brink of civil strife. Under these circumstances, any reversal of the ongoing negotiations is fraught with unpredictable consequences, not only for South Africa but also for the rest of the continent of Africa and beyond. Hence, we welcomed the willingness of the parties concerned to return to negotiations and to move forward the process of peaceful transition. We share the widespread conviction that CODESA remains the appropriate framework for peacefully organizing a democratic transition in South Africa. At the same time we must ensure that South Africa is not given an opportunity to manipulate and scuttle the negotiations by turning one group against another to exploit the rivalries that divide a frustrated and impoverished majority, or even to foment unrest in the country. My delegation has noted with regret that some countries have unilaterally decided to lift sanctions against South Africa, which went beyond the common position agreed upon by the international community on the phased lifting of such sanctions. In this context, the Tenth Summit Meeting of Non-Aligned Countries, held in September, cautioned against any premature restoration of full-fledged economic and political relations with Pretoria and underscored the need for cohesion and concerted action by all States so that the necessary pressures will continue to be exerted until an irreversible stage is reached in the negotiations to establish an egalitarian society in South Africa. The Summit Meeting further resolved that the emplacement of an interim government, or a transitional authority, charged with supervising the transition to democratic rule, including the holding of free and fair elections under universal suffrage, would constitute the pivotal beginning of an irreversible march towards the elimination of apartheid. Only at that stage, the Summit Meeting concluded, can the international community enter into a relationship with a South Africa that is resolutely engaged on the path towards a post- apartheid society. For more than four decades the Assembly has been seized of the intolerable onslaught on human dignity and the violation of human rights in South Africa. The consideration of this item during that time has made an (Mr. Wisnumurti, Indonesia) invaluable contribution in bolstering the legitimate claims for equality and justice for the black majority. It was this forum that also set forth the guiding principles for the elimination of apartheid at its sixteenth special session, held in 1989, and for the advent of a united and non-racial South Africa. However, since its objective remains unfulfilled, the Organization should remain seized of the question and expedite the democratic transformation of South Africa. Hence, the challenges before the United Nations in general, and the Special Committee against Apartheid in particular, cannot be overemphasized. We remain convinced that reconciliation and democratization will prevail and that political, economic and social justice for the people of South Africa will become a reality. Mr. KHERBI (Algeria) (interpretation from French): Since 1946 the United Nations has been trying to put an end to this intolerable affront to human dignity, the system of apartheid, which for decades has been a serious challenge to the principles of the Charter and to the fundamental rules of universal morality and international law. We had to wait until the forty-sixth session of the General Assembly to come across a little hope and optimism in the debate, which was brought about by the encouraging developments which took place in the year 1991. Without any doubt the Assembly encouraged those developments, in that the consensus adoption, on 14 December 1989, of the United Nations Declaration on Apartheid and its Destructive Consequences in Southern Africa gave effect to the will of the international community to eradicate that odious system, and it set forth the ways and means for global and multifaceted actions to speed the advent of a united, democratic and non-racial South Africa. The Security Council did not remain aloof in the face of these brutal and repulsive measures of repression against the black majority. International sanctions, which are still in force, were imposed in order to isolate the South African regime and to compel it to begin a negotiating process to put an end to racial discrimination. The combination of the heroic struggle of the people of South Africa for freedom, dignity and justice, and of international pressure finally proved decisive. Considerable progress has now been made; the legal underpinnings of the apartheid system have gradually been dismantled; most of the political prisoners have now been released; and, finally, an encouraging negotiating process has now been entered into on the constitutional future of the country. This progress, which could not have come about without the courage and the spirit of compromise of Mr. Mandela and Mr. de Klerk, was sustained by the support and encouragement of Africa and the entire international community. These positive steps forward came to a halt in 1992, with the reappearance of violence and intolerance, which dealt harsh blows to the peace process, and this process has now been delayed and made more vulnerable. The massacres at Boipatong on 17 June 1992, and in Ciskei on 7 September 1992, among others, marked an intensification of the phenomenon of violence, which has taken more than 10,000 victims in four years, heightening passions and endangering the negotiating machinery which was so laboriously put in place late last year. This disturbing situation was considered by the Summit Conference of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in June 1992 in Dakar. The OAU expressed its concern, called for the urgent convening of the Security Council and dispatched a nine-member Ministerial delegation, on which Algeria had the honour to serve, to make Africa's views known to the Council. The Security Council met and unanimously adopted resolution 765 (1992) of 16 July 1992, in which it condemned the escalating violence, urged the South African authorities to take immediate measures to bring an effective end to the violence, protect the life and property of all South Africans and bring those responsible to justice. In the same resolution the Security Council also invited the Secretary-General to appoint, as a matter of urgency, a Special Representative in order to recommend, after, inter alia, discussion with the parties concerned, measures which would assist in bringing an end to the violence. Since then the Secretary-General and his Special Representative have made praiseworthy efforts to put an end to the violence, to shore up the progress achieved and to generate the necessary conditions for resuming negotiations. This presupposes that the South African Government assumes full responsibility for ensuring the security of all South Africans, since any collusion is liable to exacerbate still further a situation that is already a cause of concern. It is not enough to explain matters in a way that simply lays blame on ethnic rivalry in the black majority. This theory fails even the most cursory analysis. There are serious indications that hidden, powerful and well-organized forces, with backing within the security forces themselves, are feeding the spiral of violence, stirring up ethnic differences and provoking bloody clashes and aggression against the innocent. Moreover, it is also imperative that the South African Government fully meet its commitment to the freeing of political prisoners. The international community should also provide the necessary support, in particular to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, to permit the return of refugees and their proper reintegration in South African society. Continuing humanitarian, legal and educational assistance to freed political prisoners and exiles returning home must remain a focus of our attention. I wish also to underscore the ongoing highly positive part being played by the OAU. This is particularly clear from the conclusions of the summit meeting of its Ad hoc Committee for Southern Africa held on 15 October 1992 in Gaborone. The appointment of a special representative of the Secretary-General of the OAU, Ambassador Legwaila of Botswana, and the presence on the spot of OAU observers alongside those sent by the United Nations, the European Community and the Commonwealth, demonstrate the desire of the entire international community to exercise whatever vigilance is necessary to put an end to violence in South Africa and promote a constitutional future that can be worked out only by South Africans themselves. While noting the positive developments and encouraging prospects now opening up for the South African people, which has suffered and struggled for decades, it is essential to stress that the experience of the past few months teaches us that we must be \rery vigilant and ready to give our brothers in South Africa all the assistance they need to attain the exercise of their right to peace, democracy and freedom. The meeting rose at 5.25 p.m.