S/PV.1258 Security Council

In accordance with the previous decision of the Council, 1 propose to invite the representatives of Algeria, India, Pakistan, Ghana, Zambia, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Mali, the United Republic of Tanzania and Nigeria to participate, without vote, in theCouncil’s discussions. At the invitation of the Presideat, Mr. T. Bouattowa (Aigeria). Mr. 0. Partbasantbi (India), Mr. Amjad Ali (Pakistan). Mr. A. Quaison-Sackey!Gbaaa), Mr. F. M. Molikita (Zambia). A&. G. B. 0. Collier (Sierra Leone), Mr. 0. S. Diop @enegal), Mr. S. Coulibaly (Mali), Mr. E. P. Mwaluko (Unfted Republic of Taazania) and Mr. D. 0. lbekwe (Nigeria) took tbe places reserved for tbem in front of tbe Couacff table.

1 have also received a request from the representative of Guinea [S/6919] that he be allowed to participate in the discussion of this item. If there are no objections, 1 propose to invite the representative of Guinea to participate in the debate. without the right to vote. It was SO deoided.

1 wish to inform the Council that, in accordance with the decision adopted at the 1257th meeting, the Secretary-General has sent to the Governments of South Africa and Portugal tables inviting them to be represented ln this debate.

1 tahe it that at the last meeting the Council agreed that a preliminary urgent step was needed. The preliminary urgent step we are now suggesting is the draft resolution[S/6921] whioh reads as follows: “The Sscurity Council “1. Decides to condemn the unilateral declaration of independence made bv the racist minority in Scuthern Rbodesia and declare illegal the authorities in Southern Rhodesia; “2. Decides to cal1 upon ail States not to recognize the illegal authorities in Southern Rhodesia and to refrain from rendering any assistance to that illegal régime.” 5. The draft resolution is intended to prevent any recognition of or assistance to the illegal régime in Southern Rhodesia. We bave all agreed that that minority régime is lllegal, that its presence is immoral, that its continuation is wrong. The situation is deteriorating every hour. We feel that we are ail now engaged in a healthy struggle for the preservatien of the authority of this Council. The act of the minority in Southern Rhodesia bas no precedent in the annals of the United Nations. What is urgently 6. We need not say that recognition is tendered to a sovereign State. Sovereignty resides withthepeople, and the majority of the people in SoutbernRhodesia - net to speak of tbe world at large -oppose the present régime. ‘7. We should make it clear that any State tbat recognizes this illegal régime is a partner to a responsibllity - 1 would say a partner to an act of defiance towards every value for wbich tbe United Nations stands. If alI States co-operate, we sball be abIe to freese ail tbat régime% activities. Otherwlse, we sball be opening the door to moreacts of defiance, suppression and dlsorder, to more denials of the elementary prinoiples of justice. 6. Members are entitled to exercise a legal judgement on the régime% validlty, capacity and effectiveness. This draft resolution serves that very purpose. The text is not controversial. There is nothhg in it tbat leaves mom for dlsagreement or controversy. It is urgently and badly needed; it is needed now. 1 therefore hope tbat tbe Council wlll vote on the draft resolution before it proceeds witb its deliberations.

Before the Coumil proceeds to tbe vote, I should like to know if there are any members who wlsh to speak. 16. IVfr. SRYUOUX (France) (trânslatedfmmFrenob): I bave receivedinstruotions to state most categorically to tbe SecurIty Couacil tbat the Frenoh Government total& diSaPPmVeS of the unilateral deoision whioh bas luet heen taken at Salisbury. Consequently, my Government does net lntend to recognise the validhy of Southern Rhodesia’s deolaration of independence. It Will Ed enter into SDy relStiOnS with the de facto authority at Salisbury or its representatives and wlI1 net lend it any kind of assistance. Il. Rut the very fact that a rebellion is involved seems, in my GovernmentYs view. to set a limit to United Nations action in this affalr. The issue is not between states and the confIict between the united and Southern Rhodesia ia therefore an an od one. TO describe it otherwlse vmuld, in fact, establish Salisbury% claims, which is fuat rance, for its part, refuses to do. Inthe tion muet therefore be regarded amtter. ~~uent~y, aq the votes which are to be taken. Will abstain in “Decides to condemn the unilateral declaralion of independence made by the racist minority in SOuthern Bhodesia and declare illegal the authorities in Southern Ehodesia”. In a very technical, academic or constitutional sense, the British authority in Southern Fthodesia still prevails, and the representative of the UnitedKingdom told us tbis mornlng [1257th meeting] that its responsibility for the population in Southern Ehodesia still exists. That being SO, what we are trying to do by this language is to declare illegal “its authority” in Southern Ehodesia - that is to say. the racist mino&ty authority in Southern Bhodesia. 1 would therefore propose to substitute the words “its authority” for the words “the authorities”.

1 am very glad that the representative of Malaysia bas raised this point because it was in my mind also. 1 did indicate that we, for OUI’ part, welcome this draft resolution whlch is in line with the vlew of the British Government and wlth my statement. 14. There is, however, a real diiiculty about the words “tbe authorities”. As it stands, for example, it would include the Governor, who bas made clear bis loyalty to what is the lawful authority in Southern Ehodesia. 1 would therefore request the representative of Jordan to be good enough to accept the suggestion tbat has been made by the representative of Malaysia, a suggestion which 1 should like to support. that paragrapb 1 should read: “Decides to condemn the unilateral declaration of independence made by the racist minority inSoutbern Bhodesia and declare” - let us put it most clearly - “tbat mtnority% authority in SoutbernRhodesiatobe illegal”.

We are in basic agreement with the draft resolution submitted by Jordan, but at tbe sanie time we agree with the observation made by the representative of Malaysia. 16. This morning, when 1 spoke briefly, 1 indicatel that it would be a mistake to refer to tbis rebat mimrity movement as a régime or government. Tln representative of the United Kingdom informed us thir mornlng tbat the United EingdomCioverntnent. tbrougl tbe Governor, had deprived of its powers and refusec to recogniae the régime inpowerlnSouthernEhodesia As far as the Security CounciI is ConCeNed, there existe at tbe present tirne in Soutbern Ebodesia a rebeI movement which does net constitute a régimr and bas sot establisbed an organ of governnient. Ii the Security Cou&l refers to “the autborities” 01 tl-m réggime in desia, it WilI be sprinkling then: wltb baptismal water inntead of condenudng tbem. 18. Witb regard to paragrapb 2 of the draft resolutien. 1 would propose that tbe last words. aillegsl s . w, be replaced by tbe words arebel morement”. st net say Vhat illegal régimea, because we feel that we must net at present recognize the existence of a governing régime, but simpIy a rebel movement. 19. 1 place great emphasis on one point wbich 1 titink is of importance. The declarationof independence does not shock “6 because it is unilateral; it shocks us, fundamentally, because it is made by a racist minority. Tlmoughout history deolarations of independence bave always been unilateral acts. The declaration we are condidering is therefore net evil because it is unilateral; it is eviI because it has been made by a racist minority to oppress and coerce a luge majority. For if we condemn tbis act on the sole ground that it is unilateral. then the question arises: if all the more than 4 million people of 85uthern Rhodes& were to declare independence, would tbat deolaration be condemned in the same manner because it was unilateral? Perhaps in tbat case the chorus of denunciations wo”Id be stilled. Therefore we peint out tbat the legal aspect of the mndemnation of the deomration arises. net from the fact tbat the decmration was made unilaterally, but from the tact that it w-as made by a racist minority in furtheranoe of political goals which should be COll&Il”led. FARRA (Jordan): Twoobservationswere ference to the second part of paragraph 1 resolution. It bas been etated tbat the SeoOnd part, in its present form, may lead to some g. This of ccurse was the words TIie auracist mkiority in art of tbe sentence. tanding 1 would like tb text to b-e very cleg. 1 think the suggestion of the representative of IAalaysia serves the purpose. WB could aubstitute the words aits authority” for the 21. As to the second observation, made by the representative of Uruguay, his intention, of course, is to strengthen tbe present text and 1 am grateful to him for the constructive suggestion he has presented. In order to make the text very clear. 1 would suggest adding in paragraph 1, before the word “authorities”. tbe word “rebellious”, SO that paragraph 1 would read: “Decides to condemn tbe unilateral declaration of indenendence made bv the racist minoritv in Southern Rhodesia and declare illegal the rehellious autborities in Southern Rhodesia”. This would make it very clear and, 1 hope, acceptable to the representative of Uruguay. 22. We could also in the second paragraph, substitute thr word nrebellion”for the word “authorities”. Paragraph 2 would thus read: “Decides to cal1 upon all States not to recognize the illegal rebellion in Southern Rhodesia ad to refraim from rendering any assistance to that illegal régimen. 1 hope this would clarify the second paragraph and make it also acceptable.

It is my Impression that those who have just taken part in the debate, although they bave the best Intentions and are endeavouring to produce as clear and effective a draft as possible, bave nevertheless sown some confusion in our minds. 1 would therefore. wtth all due respect, ask the Council to agree to a brief recess of about fifteen minutes, SO that we may reach final agreement on the wording of thIs draft resolution. If tbere are no objections, 1 shall suspend the meeting for fifteen minutes. ne mSeting wss suspenrfed at 4.45 p.m. aqd x-e- S at 5.25p.m.

1 am sorry for the delay, but we tried to meet all tbe observations and points raised around this table. 1 hope thIs new text [S/692I/Rev.l] will be acceptable to all rnv colleagues. It reads as follows: Vhe Security Council “1. Decides to condemn tbeunilateraldeckaration of independence made by a racist minority ir. Southern Rbodesia; "2. Decides to call upon all States not to recognise this Illegal racist minority régime in Southern Bhodesia andto refrain from rendering any assistance to the illegal régime.”

Wben the situation in Southern Rhodesia was discussed in the Seourity Council early in May 1965.1 ventured to believe that. in tbe Iigbt of the United Kingdom Prime lvIInIster% 26. AS far a5 tbe objective is concerued, there is little dlsagreement between the administering Power and the African States and, indeed, between all members of tbîs body. Tbe objective is to safeguard tic interests of the 4 million indigenous people. 27. My delegation is gratified to note that prompt political and economic measures bave been taken by tbe United KingdGm Government and that these measures bave tbe support of the Uniteci States; they command, 1 believe, tbe endorsement of ail States Members of tbe United Nations. Economically Southern ?bodesia is particularly vulnerable and cannGt long thstand an economic siege. My delegation earnestly napes that chese economic measures Will give Southern RhodeSi an OppGrtunity t0 beed tbe vGiCe Gf reason and to reverse tbe dangercus trend of affairs now tbreaterdng the welfare Of ail its citizens. 28. With regard to what further measures are necessary and feasible for the implementation of the resolutions adopted by the Genera! Assembly, 1 think tbey lie within tbe responsibility of the admlnistering Power a5 events unfGld themselves. In the meantime it is incumbent on this Council to make known its condemnation of the illegal act on the part of tbe minority gr~up and to express the stmngest admmitions about the diSaStmus CGnSeqUenceS if the counsel of reason does net prevail.

If tbere are no objections, we shall pruceed to vote on tbe revlsed draft resoluticn which has been just read out by the representative of JGrdan [S/6921/Rev.l]. A vote was tien by show ofhsads. kh faveur: Bolivia, China, Ivory Coast, JGrdan, Malaysia, Netherlands, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay. Against: None. AbstaiaIng: France. i%e draf? resolutioo was adopted by 10 votes tG none, wfCh 1 abs~eneation.z/ la p-txlamatbrn Isis tiement :eïre Conseil &s délégations mim des Bsrgement. gstiFé 32. d&de s.hdo5aés exalté, la Faire~. vd0neé en dépit garmisation dans devant truaisième de uamime 37. On three occasions the Special Committee sent a Sub-Committee to London to discuss the situation in Southern Rhodesia with the United Kingdom Government. The continua1 deterioration of the situation in Scuthern Rhodesia has constantly been brought to the attention of the United Kingdom Government. 38. ?luch to our regret, however, ail the efforts of the General Assembly and the Special Committee had no effect on the United Kingdom Government, which continued to display the most crimimdly complaisant attitude towards the settlers in the Territory, despite the fact that the latter never made any secret of tbeir ambition to turn Southern Fihodesia into a State pursuing a policy of apartheid. 39. In September 1963, after the Conference on the dissolution of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, tbe African countries were deeply concerned on learning that the United Kingdom intended to transfer certain attributes of sovereignty to the settler Government of Rhodes& in particular armed forces and a substantial air force. In view of the tbreat that such a transfer would constitute for tbe Zimbabwe people in particular and for all Africans in general, the thirtytwo African States Members of the Unlted Nations asked for a meeting of tbe Security Council. After considering the African couatries’ complaintandafter hearing the views of the African delegations which tcok part in the debate in the Council, tbe members of tbe invites the wnited x0 Govemmat to tmnsfer to its colony of Southern forces and aiicmft as en- Africa Cenference, 1963; “3. mvites the Gcvernment of tbe United Ring- 40. de son droit résolution. m-d qu’il plaçait m delegation used adoption of tl-?at We find it ksrd to believe tkat, wken it duce tke United course of tke skould iilre to statemts made by African Heads aplagals s.nd an tkte warn e¶d5ofSt.ateandbytie ation of African mity. ck la tbe principal re apparent that tbe United to encourage tke situation ment witk Il*, it is Dow 44. The main argument advanced by the Unlted Kingdom iS tbat a Parliamentary Convention concluded in 1923 between the United Klldom snd the white settlers of the Territory prevents it from intervening in the constitutional affairs of the Territory. Boes the Unlted Kingdom forget, however, that, in 1669, when it granted a Royal Charter to the British South Africa Company in Southern Rhodesia, it guaranteed the laws, customs and sovereignty of the African population in the Territory? That Charter stipulate& in fact, chat. in case of conflict between the settlers and the inhabitants, the interests of the indigenous populations were to prevail. At the present time there is conflict between the settlers and +he Zimbabwe people. 1 should like to ask the United Kingdom representative what hls Government intends tc do to safeguard the interests of the indigenous Africans. 1 should also like to ask the United Kingdom representative whether his Government regards itself as bound more by agreements with white settlers than by those concluded with African pecples. Even if the United Klngdom representative dces not answer the latter question, the position taken by the United Kingdom Government on the question of Scuthern Rhodesia constitutes in itself a very significant reply. 45. Apart from the Royal Charter to which 1 bave just referred, the United Klngdom Government is also bound by Article 73 of the Charter of the United Nations to defend the interests of the Zimbabwepeople fatetLl;buses by the settlers. Article 73 provides, : %Iemhers of the United Nations which bave or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples bave not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote totheutmost, whhtn the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territorics . . . ” 46. 1 believe that the responsibility of the United Kingdom in the grave situation which obtains in Southern Rhodesia is beyond dispute. The United Kingdom hae itself declared repeatedly that it was responsible in the matter of the lndependence of the Territory. But two days ago the white settlers of Scuthern Rhodesia rebelled against the United Kingdom Government and pmolaimed tbe fndependence of the Territory. 47. What we aek of tbe United Kingdom Government 7x0~ fs mt statements whfch, in certain cases, in- 48. The situation in Southern Rhodesia is eXCeptiOnally grave because it constitutes a threat to international p@ace and security. Effective measures must therefore be taken to deal with il. That is why we listened most attentively to the statement made this morning by the United Kingdom representative. However, wit.h ail due respect to him as Foreign Secretary, and to the country which he represents. 1 must say that I was somewhat disappointed at the measures envisag@d, for they are clearly inadequate in view of the gravity of Une situation. Some of those measures are not really measures at ail, and the effectiveness of the measures, taken as a whole, is extremely doubtful. Tb@ United Kingdom representative tells us lb& there is no longer any legal authority in Rhodesia, and he referred to Smith as the ‘former Prime Minister”, but we sbould bave Med at the same time to hem of practical steps taken by the United Kingdom to gusrantee the security of the peoples of the Territory for wbom it recognises its responsibility. Kor does tbe United Kingdom tel1 us wbat it has decided to do to restore legality in Southern Bhodesia ami to establisb a democratic Government elected by tbe peuple as a wbole on the basis of universal suffrage. Ewryone hnows tbat the tbreat of economtc sanctions advocated by the United Kingdom cannot haw immediate consequences lihely to lead to the C s desired by the Zimbabwe people. 1s the United Kingdom poing to leave the Zimbabwe people for mont& or perhaps years, in th@ bands of a group of persans whom tbe United Kingdom Government itself regards as being in a state of rebellion? 49. Conaing after other earlier siatements by the United Kingdom, the statemen? which the United Kingdom representative made today has net reas*tm@d us at ail. The members of the Security COUIE~~ Will r@call that, in 1963, during the Council debat@ on tbe question of Southern Rhodesia, we w@r@ assured chat the United Kingdom would retain COntrOl over tbe external defence of Southern -Rhod@sia, includmg the deployment of its forces outside Rhodesia. Y@st@rday, however, the illegal government of Southern Rbodesia published a series of texts, one of whioh provides for the use of the Rhodesian army outside th@ frOnti@rS of the Territory. 1 should like to kiow what th@ United Kingdom is going to do to prevent such US@ Of the forces which it bas placed at the disposa1 of the Rhodesian Government now in rerolt againSt the British Crown. 52. Because of the gravity of the question confronting us, rny delegation believes that tbe Council should act very promptly to prevent any deterioration of the situation based on force which now exists in Southern Rhodesia. 1 would therefore suggest that the Council should urge the United Kingdom to take effective measures, including recourse to force, to restore normal conditions in Sou”ern Rhodesia SO that the Zimbabwe people may benefit fully from the provisions of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV). My delegation reaIly does not see how the use of force against persans in a state of rebellion cari be avoided. In addition to the action to be requested of the United Kingdom, my delegation also believes that the Security Council should decide to take the measures provided for in Chapter VII of the Charter, in order to prevent any deterioration or extension of the situation. Here, 1 haw in mind Articles41, 42 and 43 of the Charter. In carrying out these measures, the Security Council should, as 1 bave just said, request the assistance of the Organisation of African Unity, as was done in the case of another region. 53. Before concluding, 1 should make it clear that the fact tbat we bave placed the matter before the Security Councll should net be construed as refiecting a tendency on the part of tbe African countries to forgo a11 independent action if the Council shirks its responsibilities or its action is blocked by a veto. as was the case in September 1963. In the course of their various meetings, the Heads of State and Government of African countries took a number of decisions on the question of Southern Rhodesie and it would be a grave mistake to think that these decisions will net be implemented. 54. Before leaving the Councfl table, 1 should like, with your permission, to comment briefly on the resolution which the Council has just adopted. This morning, the United Kingdom representative told us that the only legal authority in Southern Rhodesia was the Governor. Since then, we bave learned through the Press agencies that the Governor is under house arrest and that Ian Smith threatens to expel 55. 1 ieserve tbe right to take the fluor again if necessary during the course of the debate, and 1 tbe members of tbe Council for giving me their ion.

1 give ihe flccr to tbe representative of India. 57. MP. PARTBASARATBI (India]: At tbe outset 1 should Iihe tc ocnvey to you my delegation’s sincere a~re@iation for in this debate. tc cur request tc participate nt India attach gre and the pecple of o tbe question which tbe Security Council is ncw considering. It is cne of the mcst serious and grave issues to corne up before tbe Council in its history. 58. The question of Scutbern Rhcdesia sbould net be viewed in isolation frcm other colonial and racial in South Africa. At the same session me Assembly was seized of tbe question of tbe Mandated Territcry of Scuth West Africa. The question of freedcm and independence for the pecples under Portnguese colonial dcmination’has been before the United Nations forcvsr a demde mm. For the past four years, tbe United Nations bas been exercised cver the prcblem of Scuthern Rhodesia. AI1 tbese years my delegation bas been CIOsely associated with the efforts of tbe Wnited Nations tc bring abcut the establishment of a fully representative gcvernment elected on the basis of nniversal adult suffrage in that oclony. 59. The reactionary forces of racism and fanaticism which ccmmitted an act of piracy in Scuthern Rhcdesia yesterday bave been sustained by the assistance and encouragement tbey bave received for sc long fmm pcWerful quarters in the Western world. More particularly, direct encouragement has been given by Soutb Africa and Portugal. The three forces of colonial mination is Africa, that is. Scuth Africa, the Smith clique, are acting in concert tion. te white supremacy andeconomic exploitatwo. Tbe fate Of one is inevltably linhed with the other he United m Government’s claim that rn Rhcdesia was a self-gcverning colony bas ben *&wx-hlIy rejected net cnly by the Special Comttee but &a~ by the Fourth Committee and tbe Geamd Assembly. Resolution 1147 (XVI) of the. Gma%l AssembIy clearly stated that B~uthern ~&Ma iS a Non-Sdf-Governing Territory withm the =eming of Chapter XI of the charter cf the 62. In Southern Rhodesia, the Government of the United Kingdom for many years leanedover hackwards to condone the undemocratic and racist policies ofthe minority régimes. Whilst announcing to the General Assembly that the United Kingdom was committed to taking into account the wishes of a11 the people of Southern Rhodesis, the administering Power did nothing to redress the grievances of the majority of the people. Lord Home had declared in the General Assembly in 1963: “But if having established the rule of majority, and because of our scrupulous tare to safeguard tbe interest of minorities - because that after a11 1s the essence of democracy - we are going to be put into the dock, then 1 or the representative of my Government here Will stand in the dock with our heads high. ?/ 63. The tragedy of British rule in Southern Rhodesia has been that this scrupulous tare tc build societies in which majorities rule was never seriously pursued. The wfshes of the majority were always ignored, reactionary and repressive legislation was adopted and nationalists were imprisoned, flogged, exiled and torturad. Even appeals of mercy, on purely humanitarian grounds, were ignored by tbe administering Power. 64. The Afro-Asian delegations bave continuously endeavoured to assist the United KingdcmGcvernment in dealing with tbe Scuthern Rhodesian question. We welcomed the forthright statement of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom on 27 October 19642 Unfortunately this and subsequent statements were not followed by energetic steps to curb the outrageous behavlour and ambitions of Mr. Smith and MS fellow conspirators. We havs been aware of the difficulties of the United Kingdom, although these difficulties are largely of their own creation. They bave maintained the fiction of Southern Rhodesiabeinga self-governing colony. But who attained self-government in Southern Rhodesia? Not the children of the soil, net the Africans in thefr millions but a handful of settlers and racists wha bave beea oppressing the people and exploiting the resources of Southern Rhodesiaforoveracentury. 65. The world community was shocked by the conditions prevailing in Southern Rhodesia and was en- 66. My delegation is sot convinced by the reasons given hem and elsewhere by the United Kk@Jm tion for n0t implementing the resolutions Of the General Assemhly, which asked for the abnogation Of Constitution. The Government of the Uoited in 1953 abrogated the Constitution in British Guiaoa and dismtssed the Government which had been elected on the basis ofadult suffrage. They sent troops to that territory. No regard was paid t0 the wishes Of tbe majority of tbe peuple there. No respect was sh0wn to Ministers of the Government who had been elected by the majority of the pwple of British Guiana. 67. Let us take another example, that of Aden. The United Kiim Government, only the other day, dismissed tbe Government of Aden and its Ministers, and used mllitary force to maintain its hold onthe colony. Why then has sucb cxmsfieration been sh0wn to blr. Smith whu bad publicly atmouncedhis intentionto commit an act of rebellion and treason? 1s it net pertinent to ask wby it is that when force has unjustly been used against freedom fighters by the United Kiogd0m Gvvermnent in other colonies, a rebellion of a racist minority govemment failed to rouse a stmilsr IP sponse fmm the United Kingdom Government? Respvnsible Ministers of the Untted Kingdom Government, including the PriWe Minister, stated. time md again, that force wfll net be used against the Smttb r&gime if it unilaterally and illegally declared independence. My delegation pointed out a few days ago in the General Assembly that such statements must surely encourage Mr. Smith inhis intransigence. One could cite many other examples - somefmm the sad experience of my own country - but this is nc tii to open old wounds or refer to the melancholy past. My delegation bas only highlighted a few points to bring to the attention of the Council the circumstances of inaction that inevitably led to the present situation. Our main concern now is to put an end to tbts act of piracy and to help the United Kingd0m Government in enforcing the rule of law and thus fulfil the obligations it owes to the peuple of 8 em Rhodesia and to this Organisation. 63. The action taken by Mr. Smith is a rebellion against the United Kingdom, and we earnestly trust the United Kingdom Government will deal with it as süch, that is, net hesitate to use a11 the means at their disposaI to curb this rebellion and put an end ta the activities of the Smith régime. What the racist minority led by Mr. Smith bas done is illegal and r&ellious. But tbat is not the main element in this 69. In this age of decolonisation, peoples of many territories are fighting for theirfreedomandintlependence. The Government of India bave expressed their strong moral and material support for the freedom fighters of Zimbabwe, Angola, Mozambique, so-called Portuguese Guinea, South Nrica and South West Africa. It is absurd to compare the piracy of the Smith clique to the genuine struggle of the peoples of the colonies. Mr. Smith does disservice to the people of the United States when he attempts to equate his denial of tbe birthright of the peuple of Zimbabwe to the noble war of independence whtch the people of America fought against tbeir Britishrulers. 70. India will render ail possible assistance to the Unlted Nations in its efforts to foll the attempts of the Smith racists to perpetuate their illegal rule in Southern Bhodesia. We shall offer all support to the African nationalists of Southern Bhodesia whenever necessary. My Government appeals to all States net to recognlae the Smith régime and to refrain from giving it any assistance in any sphere. ‘71. My delegation has carefully studledthe statement of Prime Minister Wilson and we have very carefuliy listened to the statement of the representative of the United Klngdom. We note tbe measures announced by the United Kingdom Government and hope that these wlll be vigorously and immediately enforced. Wefeel, however, that the serious situation demands sterner measures. 72. The Security Council has taken a momentous step, a few minutes ago, condemning the so-called unllateral independence claimed bythe racist minority of Southern Fthodesia and calling upon all Skates to treat it as an illegal régime to which no assistance shall be given. This is of course an interim step, a beginnlng. It is imperative for the Unlted Nations to take other concrete and effective measures against the usurpers in Salisbury and to take those steps with increasing severity. A few measures of economic sanction do not meet the requirements of the situation. There should be political, economlc and even mllitary measures to deal with the present situation. Our objective is clear, and that is to dislodge the usurpers of Salisbury and restore to the people of Zimbabwe their birthright of freedom, of equality and of human dignity. 73. It is conceivable that the forces of racism, reaction and colonialism in Africa may try to focus a11 their energies on Southern Bhodesia in order to maintain their position of privllege and supremacy. It appears that the whole citadel of power in southern 74. The situation is very serious. Tbe time for debate snd discussion is over. It is now time for nt actiao. The pleas of the United Nations bave t of a unilateral deolaration ber 1965. This outrageous action in defiance ofworld opinion and accepted canons of civilked behaviour Will bave far-raching consequences of* niost sericas nature. The Government of lndia condemns tbis action in the strongest terrns and express solidarity WiuI, and support of, ths African esia. I . . . Vhe Brltish Government bas now tahen certain measupes to aeet the situation created by the teral ver. dechwati0r.i of independence. These are, b&ted measures, and If firm action bad talwt in eadier stages, this serious situation Mt bave developed. We conaider it the British GOWmnt’S duty to nullify and checkrnate &s mm? by Smith and bis so-xlled Government and to ta& Wcessmy measures, including the use of force, as enjoined by General Assembly resolution 2022 ouc) Of 5 Novemher 1965, net to allow the rebl Go 4 million nt to consolidate its illegal hold on of Rhodesia. 11 . . . We SU n0t therefore recognize theGovernrnent which bas unilaterally seized power, and, should a ovisional government representing the people of sia, =qni*ed by the Organization ofAfrican UnitY be established, the Government of India wlll ciinhw as Sl69J9. The 6ovemment of Jhdia bas Brou ut thhfs contmversy given full suppmt to the deciaratiom made and resolutions passed on the future of Rlmlesia by th OAU. by its Conference of Weads d State md Govenunent, by the Special Committee on me Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Iadeperidence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, by the U~~ited Nations 6eneral Assembly, and by the Conferenee of Meads of State or Goverment of Non-Aligned Comatries, and bas co-sponsored all resolutions oa Rbodeeia. The Government of India wouki now, in pursuance of its firm policy. offes full co-operation to tbe Security Council, tbe General Assembly andtbe OAW in whatever steps tbey may propose to deal with the problems posed by tic unilateral d&asatien of independence. For this purpose the Government of India would maintain close touch with the friencily Governments in Africa, andof the Communwealtb an@ oébers 80 as éo cieal with tbie serious development. V!he situation created by the utiateral declara- éion of iradependence is net only explosive but a serious danger to international peace. Nere are an tlze elements of racism, reactbn, fanaticism. disunity and exploitation of mn by mm. PIere it is being plamed tbat Angola, Nozambicpe md South West Africa are to be kegt in one foorm or aaothe+ in peq&ml bondage. ‘Ehe Govemment of India, therefme, feels th5t the future of Rhodesia is an issue of the greatest i6nportance inthe whnk process d decobnization, because the marner in which the unilateral declaration of intiependence is nowàaan&led will bave tbe most serious consecpencee for tbe peace, stability and pmgress of the Be of tbe African continent and of Asia and Une world.” 81. There sbould be no besitation. There are several reasons why the Security Council should be able to take action against Mr. Smitb and his graup with an easy conscience. Let us briefly examine the case against these outlaws. 82. In the first place, they have set up a Government of the many, by the few, for tbe sole bsnefit of the few and to tbe utter misery of tbe many. Tbis is lndefensible. 63. Secondly, it is a Government setupwithout rbyme or reason. The authors of this r6gime belong to a very tiny settlement comprisingabout200,000persons as against 4 million well-bebaved citizens. in their own country, wbere they have always lived from time immemorial, generation upon generation, before the advent of Britlsh rule. 84. Tbirdly, tbe injustice whlch has been and is still being perpemated against these 4 million Africans must now be crying to heaven for vengeance; for whereao they, on their part, practically accept tbese settlers as part and parce1 of theircommunity, hoping tbat tbey Will all join hands to build a multiracial sooiety. these settlers, on their part. bave had the hddness and the effrontery to seek to enslave them in their God-given land. A more cruel and savage act of history has not yet been recorded in modem times. Such tbings happened only in the dark ages. 65. Fourthly, the authors of tbis curious r&gimehave dared to snatch and grab power like highway robbers, and they have done it with su& reckless abandon tbat it bas sbocked the conscience of a11 mankind. Their action is contrary not only to good sense but to good law. 86. And now that the QueeiPs representative in Soutbern Bhodesia has acted swiftly and rightly, may we ask, to wbat effect? The Wnited Kingdom Government should step in as of right ami restore law and order. This practical course of action, lu spite of its inconvenience, is the only obvious and sensible thii to do in tbe circumstances. Tbe British Government sbould now formaIly suspend the 1961 Constitution aad emure that tbe ed on that ill-fated Constitution is no 61. In brief, everything 1s against and nothing appears to be in favour of Mr. Smith and his colleagues. Are tbis grave injustice and continue to medy? The answer muet be in the 88. May 1 be permitted to remind a11 the Powers that the Saatbern Rlmdesian cpestion is g tobea test d their eincerity. Tbey a11 claim be tbe 94. The new crime prepared by the imperialistic and colonialist forces has become an accomplished fa&. Smith% racist rggime has illegally declared a socalled mdependence intended to disguise theperpetuation of raoist minority rule over tbe African people of Zimbabwe. A course of events in Southern Rhodesia of extreme danger to peace and international security bas thus achieved its culminating point. Colonialism, that hideous product of the imperialist policy of oppression of freedom-loving peoples. has hurled an open challenge to independent Africa. to ail peacelovlng peoples, to the principles of international law and to the numerous resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. 95. Just a short time ago, it was a matter only of an intention to transform Southern Rhodesia - a country belonging to an African people cruelly oppressed by British colonialtsm and the Ian Smith &gime - into a raoist State on the pattern of the Republic of Scuth Africa; now, however, the forces of colonialism have put their oriminal designs into effect. A handful of racists are openly seeking to usurp power, denying to the 4 million Africans of Zimbabwe their sacred right te independence. 96. In their cogent statements before the Security Ccamctl. the representatives of the African and A&n States bave grapbically demonstrated the tragedy of the situation of the long-suffering Zimbabwe people and the very serious consequences of the criminal end inhuman poltcy of shameless racism in Southern Rhodesia. 97. Wbat is particularly dangerous is that the establishment of a racist r&ime in Southern Rhodesia is part of wider and more sinister schemes of the imperialist and colonialist forces. The declaration of the no-oalled independence of Southern Rhodesia is related to colonialist designs not only to create an obstacle to the complete liberation of Africa but also to transform Southern Rbodesia, like tbe Republic of South Africa and the Portuguese African colonies, into a bastion of colonialism and racism. 99. Only recently the General Assembly particularly noted that coRusion between the authorities of Southern Rhodesta, the RepubRc of South Africa and Portugal was designed to strengthen the rule of the racist minority in the southern part of Africa and constituted a tbreat ta freedom, peace and securlty on tbat continent. Numerous fac& and events in recent daysbave 99. yesterday. durii the vote intbeGeneralAssemhly, the Portquese co9onialists and the South African racists again demonstrated tbeir open support for the Smith régime in Sauthem Rbodesia. That is why the sformation of Soutbern Rbodesia into an independent State controlled by racists creates a new focus of tension in Africa wbïcb tbreatens international peaee. 190. In bis statement before the Council today [~25i’th meetingp, the representative of the United condemned the action of tbe Smith clique that tbe United Kingdom Government had endeavaured to acbieve a reasonable solution of the problem. Re also recognized tbe international significance of tbe matter and tbe importance of its discussion in tbe Security Council, altbough we cannot but note that this is a rather belated recognition on the United Mngdom’s part. The representative of tbe United Kingdom also spoke of measures which bis Government intends to take at this juncture. As we carefully listened to bis statement. we could not beIp wondering why the Uuited Ringdom Government bad not opposed the implementation of the criminal designs of the Soutbern Rhodesian racists from the very star& ami why it bad proceeded step by step in a kind of escalation of measures which in no way indicated its desire to stop a dangerous trend of events. 101. If we consider facts rather than verbal assurances, however charged with emotion they may be. there remains no doubt tbat the United Kingdom net only remained deliberately passive in the face of the beightened and frensied activity of the racist forces, but also in fact encouraged them. 102. As far back as 1961. when the racist Constimtien of Southern Rhodesia was adopted, the United Ringdom. by its approval, transferred dominion over tbe African population of the country to the white minority. That arch-reactionary document, generously granted by tbe United Kingdom Government to Southern Rhodesia. was obviously intended to consolidate the power of the wbite racists. since it provided neither for tbe establishment of truly representative organs of government nor for the introduction of equal and mdversal suffrage. 103. That apology for a constitution provided for parliamentary representation on tbe basis of one 104. The next step in the United Kingdom’s assistance to the Southern Rhodesian racists tcok place at the beginning of 1964, at the time of the dissolution of the former Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, when the armed forces of that Federationwereplacedunder the control of the white racists of Southern Rhcdesia. 105. As the representative of Ghana appropriately reminded the Council today, the representatives of msny countries. andprimarily of the African countries. rightly pointed out at the time that if the armed forces of the Federation. consisting of modernfigbter planes, bombers and helicopters and also ground forces composed of Europeans, were placed underthe control of the racist r6gime. the consequences would be tragic. They rightly stressed the need of the Southern Rhodesian racists for military aircraft as an instrument of mass terror, and warned that. in the event of the armed forces of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland being transferred to the Southern Rhodesian raciste.. the latter would be authorieed to use them against the indigenous African population. As we ail recall, the Government of Ghana, in the memorandum on Southern Rhodesia which it submitted to the Security Council on 2 August 1963 [see S/5403], staced that the transfer of these forces would constitute a most serious threat to the security of the African continent. 106. The United Kingdom ignored these warningsand demands. Indeed, the United Kingdom representative even spoke in the Security Council of constitutional progress. With the dissolution of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland on 31 December 1963, the United Kingdom Government transferred to Southern Rbodesia seven air squadrons manned by Europeans. four battalions of white troops and armcured-car units. The United Kingdom thereby consolidated the military position of the racist régime in Southern Rhodesia. If we are to call a spade a spade, then the United Kingdom by its action put into the racists’ hands the weapons for their struggle against the African people. In this way, a potential threat turned into a real one that is directecl not only against the indigenous population of Southern Rhodesia but also against the neighbouring independent countries, ancl indeed the whole of Africa. 107. The next step was tsken by the racist forces of Southern Rhodesia themselves. and of course this time again with the connivance of the United Kingdom, when the Smith clique decided in May 1965 todissolve Par- Rament and to hold so-called elections. %hodesia% destiny demands decisive and urgent steps to be taken for the protection of sll tbe ideals of Western civilisation in wbich we believe. . . 1 mn tkrefore e.aUing an electian asking for and hoping for tbirds majority in Parliament wbich wilI stre our hand, mat only for the passing of important park3mentary legislation. but also in OUT m?gotiatiQns for imlependence witb tbe Bfitisb Government m. 9 109. As a result of these mock eleetians. Smith% faseist-type p , as V+as to be czqa?cted, contrivea a majority of se& for itself inthe racist ParRament. the way vas made even clearer for tbe rechless cies of raeism. 119. And he tIte question arises: what position did tbe Wnite m take. and how did il react to all tbis? Tbe fa& show tbat tbe Uoited Kingdom Gcvernment sougbt to justify the actions of the racists and thereby merely e them and urged them on to uswp pmver. spe 20 August 1955 at Lagos, MS= Bottomley, the United IOngdom Secretary of State for Commonwealtb Relations, unabashedly declared. acecrding to a Reuters dispatch, that S~utbern Rhodesia WouId perish without the Whites, since the Africans in Soutbern Rhodesia were net ready for independence. 111. The iinited refused to void the eleo tiens in Southern a which bad been carried out on the basis of the racist Constitution. Tbis, as was pointed Qut in tbe Security Council by the Soviet delegation, gave Smith a free hand to declare socslled independence at a lime when the racist minority la& ahsolute contro1. 112. Tbe United m% policy of collusion then entend its final phase. TO star% with, Smith went to Loncàan at the beghming of October 1965. Before he Beft he made tbis cynical threat - and I quote: V?e shall se8 what happens when we get bac& Acts are more convincing then words.” In the same interview, WhiCb was widely publicized by radio and television, Sdtb boasted that he was going to London for “final aàd CQnclusive” talks on independence. Without specifying any date, Smith stressed tbat, whateverthe Wniâed Kmgdom Government might do. vwe shall be independent by Christmas”. 113. As we aR hnow, tbe discussions between Prime inister Wilson and Smith in London, wbicb had been fnterrupted. were resnmed at tbe end of October at Salisbury. It was furtbermore obvious to everyone that . Wilson% trip to Southern Rhodesia was nothing a Propage&a move for external consumption. In point of fa& the United Kingdom had already officially am? publioly stated, on 23 August, tbrougb its Secre- 114. Significantly, Mr. Chikerema, theDeputy President of the Zimbabwe African People’s Union, declared on 23 October, the eve of Mr. Wilson’s trip t0 Salisbury, that the Prime Minister% visit to Southern Rhodesia was - and 1 quote - *the last act in a most flagrant and shameless colonialist consniracv”. Accordmg to an Agence France-Presse dispaich oi36 October from Salisburl. Mr. Sithde. tbe head of the Zimbabwe African National Union, commented on Mr. Wilson’s trip to Salisbury as follows: “We are greatly disappointed that the visit of the British Prime Minister failed to secure the satisfaction of our two principal demands - the immediate calling of a constitutional conference and the immediate establishment of majority rule.” Also according to Agence France-Presse, the United Kingdom Prime Minister’s reply to the demand for the immediate hohiing of a constitutional conference was that feelings were running too high at the time for the calling of such a conference. 115. Yet this morning the United States representative lauded the United Kingdom’s efforts, portraying them as directed at preventing the crime in Southern Rhodesia. He said that the United Kingdom Government had done everythmg possible to tbat end andbad actcd resolutely, and SO forth. These pronouncements, however. are by no means borne out by the facts. The United Kingdom in this instance acted with truly extraordinary punctiliousness. indecision and restraint, although we know that in other cases it has acted far more rcsolutely and uncompromisingly. 116. As we know, the United Kingdom Government bad no hestitation in interveningforthwith in the affairs of British Guiana. By means of constitutional machinations and in defiance of tbe Will of the people, it succceded in changing the existing electoral system and overthrowing Prime Minister Cheddi Jagan, who had three times obtained a majortty in the elections but who was not to the likiig of the United Kingdom. 117. Nor cari we forget another example of very speedy action on the United Kingdom’s part, in connexion with the situation in Aden. On 25 September 1965. the United Kingdom unceremoniouslyintervened in the afairs of that colony, suspended the provisional Constitution, dissolved the Legislative Council, promptly removed the Aden Ministers from officeand assumed direct control of Aden. 118. Other speakers who addressed the Council esrlter, in particular the representative of Indta, have already called attention to these cases. It isno secret to anyone tbat the United Ktngdom Government has not 19. ar I ‘est B juste titre, .ctatt le 2 novembre 13.9. T SS bas had some very tnterestm to =Y tbe activities of the UniFed f&vemmenF. The Ghanaian Times of 2 Novemher 1965 aptly noh?lk V&-. Wilson% statement in the Wouse of Gommons ewed as clear evidence of tac s intention to twn Szmthern r in the international arena. on Fbe pattern of the RepubRe of South Africa.” 126. Pourtant, a situation nenapante. nteutton :‘estd-dire fénérale ation lement raciste rient I cette fin tous les moyens force Uni? àiguSi des avis de l’Assembl6e. ment fait bien s’est 126. EQSn wken tàe SitUation in tk&hem RhodeSia t~ok on a menaclng aspect at the begimùng of this monFb, the Wnited m dtd not display any readmess to alter its position. On 5 November. that weeh ago, the General Assembly bu an ng majority adopter3 resolutton 2922 g upon the United Ringdom Government to suspend the racist Constitution of 1961 in Southern Rhodesia and to create a truly representativegovernment in that country. employing ail necessary measures Fo that end. including military force. And repeatiig itself, anci the same Fbing hsppened agam yesterday in the voting in the General Assembly. 121. sentant que le Gouvernement a prendre C’est exceptionnel Royaume-Uni de patience, solutions qu’il a expose devant que comme risquent les racistes 129. Taday’s statement by the representative of the ar that the cm OfFaking astcnished speak once more, at Ws critical time, of Fhe need for showing patients and restraint, for trying to find compromise sdutions, ancI SO on. The programme of action which b@ ~utlined in Fbe Council cari achally be descrqxed as noFbiug more than a series of haif measures unlikely to make any serins impression on highhanded racists. 122. As regards the econcmic mensures againsl Soatbern Rbcdesia anucunced by the United Ringdom, it ts to be ncted first of allthat they are very relative in character. Even measuies which might bave bac s5me effect on the Sauthern Rhodesian racists if tha om had adopted them in time, such a<i rts of Rhodestan tobacco. now appea more in the nature of a smohe-screen. That point was riabtly made fust now bv the reoresentative 0: Nigeria. As csn be seen fro& the Fin&&al Times 0: on. of 1 Octcber 1965. Southern Rhodesia bar alreadj sold all of this year’s tobacco trop to fore@ estion of marketing the newtobacct ot arise until March1966. Thus, thq m embargo on the import of Rhodesiar 123. As has already been polnted out by a number of African representatives. another point deserving attention is the absence among the economic measures purportedly belng taken by the United Kingdom against Soutbern Rhodesia of anything as important as cutting off supplies of oil to Southern Rhodesia. The significame of such a measure is, however, obvious, as the United Kinadom Press itself points out. For example. The Tirne; of London of 5 November wrltes that an oil embargo would be the most effective means of hurting the Southern Flhodesian racists. Such an embargo, The Times writes, would be a considerable inoonvenlence to Rhodesla% road and air communications, and the strain on the railways in particular and the economy in general would be severe. 124. If, added to ail thls, the emphasis again laid by the Unlted Kîngdom representative onthe inadvlsability of using force is borne in mind, then the picture becomes even clearer. He said that extreme measures and force agalnst the Southern Rhodeslan racists should be avolded. Let lt be noted, however. that force and extreme measures are already being used in Southern Rhodesia, and bave been used for msny a day and many a year. Moresver. force is being used, net against a group or a clique of raclsts, bat agamst a whole people who are denied thelr elementary lawful rights, lncluding the rlght to self-dtermination. Nor does the action of the racists take the form of gentle persuasion or admonltions or of appeals to reason and common sense. What they use is force, brute force. We know that terrer and tyranny relgn on Zimbabwe 8011, that inhuman regulations are in force, that tens of thousands of patrlots have been rounded up in concentration camps, that people are being executed, that demonstrations are broken up. The leaders of the national liberatlonmovement are subjectedtopersecutien. 126. The United Kingdom Government must take fub responslbility for this traglc turn of events, for compllcity witb Southern Rbodesian raclsm andfor thf fact that all means of pressure, of which the Unitec Kingdom possesses more than enough, were no! brought to bear. 126. Particularly notsworthy is the clrcumstancc that one of the principal forces glving support tc Smith% raclst r6gime in its criminal actlvltiee 8x7 tbe forefgn, malnly Brltish. monopolies. Talk abou foretgn capital in Southern Rbodesfa net approvmj Smith% extremism 1s for tbe consumption of tbl credulous and tbe nal’ve. HO~, lndeed, cari anyon believe su& tales when a11 the facts indicate tha tbese monopolies bave tsken the exact opposite ~~@AIX tyramy and sacism, e Zimbabwe peuple md thsir ComM, tbe General 131. Tbe Soviet Union wamed tbat if tbe Soutbem sian racists proceeded witb tbeir crimiml eis racist +B e in SQutllsrn 133. The Seourity Council is the principal organ of the Wnited Nations invested under the Charter witb broad powers and rlghts whlch enable it to carry out effective measures against those who challenge its autbority and decisions. The Council must adopt political, economic and other sanctions against the Soutbern Rhodesian racists in accordance with the IJnited Nhtions Charter. Today tbe Council has already called upon a11 States to deny recognition to the Smith r@gime in Southern Rhodesia. 134. We agree with the views expressedby the representative of Ghana. concerning the necessity of applying sanctions against the Southern Rbodesian racists. We also agree with the views in this matter expressed by tbe rspresentative of Mali, and by other speakers. 135. As everyone knows, the Soviet Union has reso- IuteIy and consistsntly urged that the most radical measures, including necessary sanctions, should be applled by the Security Council against tbe ra,.ists and colouiaIists of Southern Rbodesia, Portugal and the Republic of South Africa. 136. ln conclusioo, we oonsider it our du@ to state that the Soviet Union remains ready to cc-operate with the African countries in extending every support to tbe 4 million people of Zimbabwe in their IaufuI e for freedom and genuine national

There are stlll a number of names on the list of speakers, but. in view of the lateness of the bour. I propose, with the consent of the Council. to adjourn this meeting. The usual informa1 consultations have been held with members of the Council, sud tbere is generak agreement that the Council shouId meet agaia at 10.30 a.m. tomorrow to continue the discmsfon of tbis item. UNITED t~ans may be obtcxined eut th. world. rations, Sales ENT SE P~~CU~S~ LES PUBLICATIONS Les publications des Notions Unies sont agences dépesitairas du monde entier. ou adrsrsaz-vous 6: Nations Unies. Section COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES Las publicaeianes de las Naeiones ecaas distribuidoras en todos portes diriiara a: Nacicnes Unidas, Secci6n