S/PV.1374 Security Council

In accordance with the decision taken at the 1372nd meeting on 8 November 1967, I propose with the consent of the Council to invite the representatives of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Portugal, Burundi, Zambia and Algeria to participate, without vote, in the discussion and to take the Places reserved for them, 6. The representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo was hardly more fortunate in his other exhibits. The Belgian magazine in question has a curious history, which I am sure the Congolese Government knows quite intimately, and the fact that a member of the Congolese Government now brings an issue of that magazine to the Secuiity Council seems to confirm that history. Be that as it may, the magazine proves nothing either. At the invitation of the President, Mr. J. Umba di Lutete (Democratic Republic of the Congo) and Mr. F. de Miranda (Portugal) took places at the Council table. At the invitation of the President, Mr. T. Nsanze’ (Burundi), Mr. J. B. Mwemba (Zambia) and Mr. T. BWttoura (Algeria) took the places reserved for them. 7. I now come to the alleged letter taken from the internal document files of the Belgian Government. Is it genuine? Is it a forgery? Was its use authorized by the Belgian Government? Was it a leakage? These are highly pertinent questions and they involve other questions of a serious nature. For this is an incredible story. It is not normal for one Government to furnish its internal documents to another for public use against a third Government, and we do not see any special reason why the Congolese Government should have appealed to Belgian documents as

Tile Council will now proceed with the examination of the question before it. The first speaker on my list is the representative of Portugal and I now call upon him.

My delegation takes the flccr this afternoon with extreme regret because we are ccastrained to analyse some ugly and distasteful aspects of the question under consideration. 8. Assuming for the sake of argument that that letter is authentic, is it open or even proper to produce as evidence an internal document of a third government? Is it going to be the future practice of the Security Council to admit such evidence? How does a government have access to the secret dispatches of another government? Will the internal correspondence of the Portuguese Government-say a letter from one of our Ambassadors to our Ministry of Foreign Affairs-be likewise accepted as evidence against a third country? More concretely, if an internal letter of the Portuguese Government is brought here stating that there are Belgian, French, British or United States mercenaries in the Congo, will such a letter be accepted as evidence? 9, In the light of all the foregoing considerations, I feel that we are right to request the Council to view the letter from the internal Belgian files with the greatest reservations. However, let us for the sake of argument, and notwithstanding all those considerations, accept the authenticity of the so-called “Belgian letter”, flourished but not submitted to examination by this Council. What does the letter say? 10. The letter says that some eighteen mercenaries and Katangese gendarmes entered Kisenge on bicycles, having advanced from Luashi, both localities being inside the Congo; that they were under the command of a Frenchman, Major Piret, and that the majority were French, there being in their number one Colombian and one Viet-Namese; that some of the sick and wounded refugees crossed the Congo border into Angola and from there were evacuated to Belgium. 11. What does all that amount to? That the Portuguese authorities may have accepted in a humanitarian spirit some wounded and dying refugees escaping from a fighting zone inside the Congo. I think my delegation is entitled to ask in what manner the Portuguese authorities contravened any international convention by acting in this way. 12. It is essential to remember that even the “Belgian letter” does not say that the mercenaries were Portuguese nationals or were sent by the Portuguese Government on their alleged mission inside the Congo. 13, Next, the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo referred to The New York Times and quoted from its issue of 5 November 1967 to adduce additional evidence against Portugal in the case of this alleged mercenary incursion into the Congo. He was supported in 15. NOW what does The New York Times article is; question reveal? In a report signed by its correspondenr, the paper gives a longish account, running into some tin columns, of alleged clandestine movement by sea aml air cf men and arms to Africa, in particular to tire Congo, tbroug+ and from Lisbon. Shorn of all sensational trimmings, eZe facts alleged by l?he New York Times correspondent bZl down to the following. 16. Planes fly through and between Lisbon and Africa carrying men and arms. Some of those planes are owned and operated by a United States concern, names Aerodyne Corporation, with offices at North Hollywood, California. and Miami, Florida. Those planes are flown by Belgian & French pilots, who are not named, and by Mr.Henr)l A Wharton and Mr. Larry Raab, both United States citizens The men they ferry to Africa are all non-Portuguese IP: nationality. The names of one Colonel Robert Denard, 3. French national, who was hired by the Congolese Govern, ment and who was kept in his job by the President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and who was said to be commander of mercenaries, and another French citizen. M. Pierre Laures, apparently a recruiting agent for mrcenaries, are listed. At least twenty Spanish nationals X? listed as having volunteered for the mercenary forces. 17. The arms shipped across to Africa are alsO net ,f Portuguese origin or manufacture. According to The&e%: York Times, “Arms merchants in France, Switzerland aef:f Spain” are alleged to have been concerned in the sUPPlY ~-9~ arms and one “French-registered transport tircrafr %Q$ reported to have arrived in Lisbon” in the week before ‘I November “from Ireland with Czechoslovak-rnanufacturc~ weapons” on its way to Africa (Ilze New York nmf$, 5 November 1967, p. 24). 18. All the above facts, if accepted at face value, imPlY r%’ following grave conclusions: that the countries exPmiy mentioned in the article in The New York Times fl “: involved and yet none of those countries is aeeusedbefLX’ the Security Council. I am not accusing a.nY ecuntryJ ‘7 stating the facts as presented by The New ycrk Times* ” the accused contries wish to deny them, then meY deny that paper itself. And if it be advanced cfl their that they have all given guarantees that they dc not in such traffic then I must also point cut that Portu given exactly the same guarantees. 20. Here I must ask some pertinent questions: why do the countries of which the mercenaries are nationals not cancel their passports and inform the Portuguese Government accordingly? Have the countries of their respective origin informed the Portuguese Government that they had declared those individuals as “mercenaries” and that their passports and other travel documents had been cancelled or invalidated? They have not. Is the Portuguese Government to take upon itself the burden of investigating whether a particular Belgian or Frenchman or some other foreigner is or is not a mercenary? And is the Portuguese Government also to bear the odium which their own Governments avoid? Was timely action taken against the California-based air corporation, the Aerodyne Corporation, and were the passports of the two pilots, Mr. Henry Wharton and Mr. Larry Raab, cancelled? Did the Governments, whose nationals are said to form the bulk of mercenaries, inform the Portuguese Government that their passports were not to be recognized as valid? The same applies to planes and/or 24. Since we are dealing with The New Yorlc Times, I think we should bring this story up to date. This morning, The New York Times carries an article which I am sure the members of the Council have already seen. It is an article by the distinguished journalist, C. L. Sulzberger, entitled, ‘The bloody land”. It tells a tale and I am sure the members of the Council have drawn their own conclusions, All that I should like to say in that connexion is that after reading that article one gets the impression that it lies ill in the mouth of the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Congo to speak about intelligence and natural resources of any country. 2.5. The representative of the Congo said here last Wednesday [1372nd meeting,l that we have an efficient police, and he even permitted himself some remarks in ba,d taste about our police just as he did about our soldiers. I must tell him that our police have more than enough work on their hands watching over the security of our own population which is threatened by murderers sent from the Congo with the aid and encouragement of the Congolese Government. And here I must remark that while so many countries seem to be concerned, and rightly, about the security of the Congo and of the Congolese population, one would have liked to see similar concern expressed about the security of lives in Angola which are threatened by murderers sent from the Congo. After all, human lives have the same value whether in the Congo or in Angola. On the other hand, the representative of the Congo cannot expect our police to watch over the security of the Congo as well, except in so far as it is possible to take all reasonable measures to impede unlawful activities launched against the Congo from Portuguese territory. This we have always been doing. But our task would be immensely facilitated if the Congolese Government were to co-operate. The Congolese Government does not seem to understand the value OF good neighbourly co-operation with us and does not seem to want it. We shall draw the right conclusions. ships having valid documents. Who grants those documents? Not the Portuguese Government. And yet everyone else is supposed to be immaculate or at any rate much less guilty than the Portuguese Government. Why did the Governments concerned for the manufacture and sale of arms listed in The New York Times article not take timely action intended to ensure that those arms did not reach the mercenaries and the Congo? 21. I ask that the members of the Council consider well those and other related questions before hastening to reach a judgement hostile to Portugal. 22. It is said that Portugal has a “positive” duty to see that no mercenaries are sent to the Congo. Would not the responsibility fall rather on the country or countries of which those mercenaries are nationals and on the country where they are recruited? And ought not those Governments that are preoccupied with the possibility of their entry into the Congo be concerned also.about the activities of their own nationals who provide such soldiers of fortune with the means of travel and take timely action to nip the mischief in the bud. Again, by what criterion are the Portuguese authorities to distinguish which planes passing through the Lisbon airport with legally valid documentation are to be impeded without incurring liability for loss in case the aircraft that is so dealt with happens to be engaged in legitimate business? It is our view that once the documentation presented on arrival in transit is found to be in order by international standards the Portuguese authorities are freed from all responsibility. 26. Co-operation, I repeat, is not what the Congolese Government wants. Yet it is the Congolese Government that is in the best position to know and identify the mercenaries since they were first employed by the Congolese Government. It could easily circulate lists of known mercenaries to all Governments, including the Government of Portugal, requesting that those individuals be impeded from returning to the Congo. Such a move would greatly facilitate the task of assisting the Congo in its difficulties. 27. We sympathize with the people of the Congo, despite all the hostility that is daily directed against US from their 23. However, my delegation asks if we ought indeed to believe all this that is based on the reports of some 28. I reserve my delegation’s right to intervene again should we deem it necessary.

I call upon the next speaker, the representative of Burundi.

Mr. President, I should like first of all to thank the speakers whose names appeared on the list ahead of me and who very kindly agreed to give up their turn to speak. 31. First and foremost, Mr. President, the delegation of the Republic of Burundi has a preliminary duty to perform, namely to pay you the tribute due to you as President of the Security Council for this month. 32. In addition to paying this well-deserved tribute to your qualities and talents, my Government has pleasure in proclaiming its whole-hearted support for the Democratic Republic of the Congo at a time when you are presiding over a debate called for by a colonial issue. This for you, Mr. President, is a distressing event of no mere academic concern, since you have suffered its effects in your own person and felt them in your heart. 33. Two, concurrent motives have prompted Burundi to participate in the discussions on the Kinshasa Government’s complaint against Lisbon: first, the key position occupied by my country compels it to play the role which nature entrusted to it by situating it at the crossroads where the four cardinal points of Africa meet. But Burundi assumes special responsibilities in addition to this geographical mission in the event of an attack on th:: Congo, for the interests of that country fuse with our own on the shores of Lake Tanganyika-the key to our future and the secret of our past. The second reason which has prompted Burundi to take part in the discussions on the Congo is the mandate given to my country by the African delegation to be their spokesman before this great tribunal. 34. Because the destiny of, our two nations is closely linked, the Government of Burundi has been closely associated with the heroic struggle of the Kinshasa authorities against the common enemy ever since the launching of the mercenary venture last July. Our support for the Congo has not been limited to mere promises or to moral support, but has been translated into concrete acts. 35. My Government’s part in the crusade against the mercenaries has brought down on our heads the full fury of Schramme’s anathema. Our contribution $0 the expulsion of the forces bent on the ddvastation of part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has caused the mercenary chief to cut off our electricity supply from the central source at Bukavu and then to threaten the country with invasion. 37. The latest acts committed by Portugal against the Congo are merely a last desperate attempt to mainttirl its iron grip on Africa. It is imperative that the menlbers of this august Council should understand fully the exact nature of the problem to which their attention is called. The subject of the present debate is the same as that of th debates of October last year and of last July. Tile day before yesterday, 8 November 1967, and again yesterday, the Security Council witnessed the Portuguese representative’s brazen defence of the outrages perpetrated bY the mercenaries. 38. There could be no better refutation of Lisbon’s dcr~ids than public notoriety backed by facts, documents, news. papers and some Governments. Some newspapers have already been challenged, but here the delegation of Dttrundi would like to put a question for the accused Govern r’318r1 t to answer. It is well known urbi et orbi, and it must bc stated that the Governments which have recently been iI1 corltact with the Portuguese Ambassadors at WashingtoIl and Brussels did not make the move without having good reason for entering into contact with the Government in question. It is also well known that these were Governments svvhich, in other circumstances, had not dissociated themselves front the Portuguese cause. Thus it is reasonable to suppose that those Governments wished to ask questions and even to express their concern, because they had weighty a~ld serious reasons for believing that an invasion was in fact irrsll~inent and that an attack on the Congo was being prepared from a territory under Portuguese domination. 39. Since all the sources referred to above agriee that eIements coming from Angola have violated the rtational sovereignty of the Congo, are we to give credence ta tile statements of Portugal, the party against which. tfje charge is made? Portugal’s situation is of course desperate. since its economic salvation lies in Africa and its survival depe& exclusively on the fabulous resources of OUT curltinent. There is no doubt that Portugal is striving hard tu retaiIl its position as the eternal parasite, and this means resorting to every imaginable expedient, however perverse, caIct~ tated to perpetuate its domination, the only weapon it car1 wield to achieve its material salvation. 40. However, an objective examination reveals tllnt tile many attacks against Kinshasa represent a series of sinister “swan songs” and distress signals. By that 1 rllcan glat, despite its fierce resistance to decolonization, tlw cou,,tu we are discussing will one day be forced to recogrlize that 46. An analysis, in the cold light of day, of the depth as well as the extent of colonialist intentions reveals a complex enterprise with all kinds of ramifications. The periodic attacks against one or other of the countries bordering the Territories under Portuguese domination are merely symptoms of a global conspiracy organized against Africa by the racist traffickers’ club. 41. Indeed it must be distressing for Portugal, having only Africa to count on, to be haunted by the certainty that once it is cut off from Africa it will quickly and surely breathe its last. Hence it is easy to understand the very cogent reasons which have led the Portuguese Government SO persistently to defy law and morality, since the restoration of Angola, Mozambique and Bissau to their rightful owners would mean automatic suicide for Portugal. This is a subtle manoeuvre to distract the attention of the African continent from the assault made on the last bastions of colonialism. 47. The action we are witnessing today is characterized by the incarnation of colonialism as inspired by the worshippers of apartheid in South Africa, the new devotees of segregation in Rhodesia, and the proponents of the policy of assimilados in the Territories under the heel of Lisbon. It goes without saying that the terrible dangers threatening Africa do not emanate from Portugal alone, impotent as it undeniably is in many respects. African perspicacity has seen through the conspiracy brewed for the purpose of perpetuating foreign monopolistic domination over the abundant wealth with which our continent has been SO generously endowed by nature. 42. The representative of the country in question has merely given his usual recital of exoneration, doing everything in his power to throw dust in the eyes of this august Council. According to the Lisbon delegation, the Portuguese Government is merely an innocent party victimized by the Democratic Republic of the Congo as a smokescreen for its own internal difficulties. Such brazen subterfuges prompt my delegation to ask a number of questions. 48. Consequently, we are forced to conclude that the aggressive acts committed by Portugal against the Congo can only be considered one step in the execution of a long-range plan, on a vast scale, aimed at consolidating for ever the position of the foreign usurpers as overlords of the best of Africa, that is, the southern and central part of our young continent. 43. Are the Lisbon authorities prepared to deny that they have played any part, direct or indirect, in the mercenary manoeuvres? Is Portugal in a position to certify that it had no knowledge whatsoever of the recruitment of mercenaries in the territories under its jurisdiction? In the same context, we would be grateful if the colonial Power would give us an assurance that it was completely unaware of the training of forces on any soil under Portuguese control for the purpose of carrying out subversive activities against the security of the Congo. While we are dealing with hypotheses, we should also like to ask whether the Lisbon Government is in a position to state that it is completely unaware that any country under its jurisdiction has afforded shelter to the aggressors who have for several weeks been plotting an invasion of the Congo. 49. Mr. Raymond Cartier, writing in Paris Match towards the end of 1953, strongly supports my delegation’s views on this subject. A quotation from his article incontestably corroborates the facts of the problem we have posed. Let US see how this French journalist describes objective number 1 of colonization, the source of the danger now threatening the existence of African nations: “Today, the European in Africa exerts all his ingenuity to find excuses for his presence there. He depicts himself as a guardian whose mission will be completed as soon as the peoples he governs have attained maturity. The white man is in Africa to stay, because it is in his interest to be there and to stay there . . . this a precise and sufficient reason for not relaxing his hold, even if he has to fight to retain it.” 44. Unfortunately for the accused! This time at least all sources of information have been unanimous in condemning Portugal and have joined forces to drive it into a position where it cannot give a negative reply to the questions I have just asked, The evidence against Lisbon is all the more incontrovertible in that it emanates from governmental and journalistic circles which are customarily on the side of the Portuguese Government. But now, in order to extricate themselves from their dilemma, these sources have allowed the evidence of the facts to prevail over their usual inclination to side with Lisbon. 50. This article is so clear that further comment is unnecessary. It follows that the activities of the mercenaries which can now be laid at Portugal’s door, far from being isolated acts, are part of a vast subversive plan drawn up with the definite aim of achieving a permanent monopoly of the inexhaustible storehouse of wealth over which that trio of vandals, Pretoria, Salisbury and Lisbon, stands guard like fierce sentries, watching over the vital interests in Africa of the foreign exploiters and beneficiaries who dictate the policy. 45. As I said a few moments ago, the Council is aware of the contacts which the Governments of Washington and Brussels have had with Lisbon in the hope of thwarting the threatened invasion in Angola. Thus, if my memory serves me correctly, the Foreign Ministry at Brussels had to 52. While the climax in the escalation of the war contemplated against Africa has not yet been reached, the Democratic Republic of the Congo is still the principal target for the Portuguese attacks. There are three reasons for this. 53. First of all Portugal, in a last-ditch stand against the imminent blows which history-with some help from the African militants-is preparing to deal it, is organizing raids by way of reprisals against the Congo. For as the Lisbon Government sees it, if the liberation movements are deprived of the support of General Mobutu’s Government, the Angolan leaders will be denied that support and will find themselves in an impasse. 54. Secondly, the Congo is a more accessible prey, and Portugal has pounced upon it in view of its proximity to Angola and most of all, in view of its tempting riches within easy reach. 5.5. Thirdiy, the Congo is exposed to repeated raids because it acts as a shield for Angola, which has become or is regarded as Portuguese property. Today Angola is the springboard for invasions; tomorrow it will degenerate into a major centre for a general attack, as part of the great strategy. 56. Reason and common sense unanimously condemn the ingratitude of those eternally ravenous wolves that first attack the nerve centre, the Congo, and then turn their attention to the other areas which the colonial Powers are seeking to malce available to the profiteers. The unparalleled variety, the inexhaustible abundance and the high quality of Africa’s vast natural resources have made it a most tempting prize for foreign interference. Thus, the assiduous diabolical activities pursued both within and without to stifle our young continent are increasing. 57. States which yesterday were incited to violence and oppression by the economic greed of their nationals today seem darkly and perversely determined to deal solely with an African continent that has been completely despoiled. That is the initial and major factor in the outbreak and persistence of warfare on Congolese territory. The crux of the problem is the unsatisfied greed of the invaders seeking to impose their laws. 58. Portugal’s major objective in its pathetic venture is vividly exposed by Jean-Paul Sartre, who at least states his position clearly and frankly. I should like to quote him: “You know perfectly well that we are exploiters. You know perfectly well that we have taken the gold and the metals and later the oil from the ‘new continents’ and 59. AS 1 am lOat t0 CatalOgLle the elltire schedule of traumas caused by colonization and to present the full picture of the evils it has wrought throu&out AfdcaS history, I feel bound to place special emphasis on the strategy of those in Africa desirous of perpetuating colonial occupation. Although most African countries have sow shaken off the chains of colonialism, it is still true tllat its economically most vital region is still being C.&d between two jaws which will not let go of their PreY1 apartlzeid and colonial dictatorship. The community of interests shared by the racist zealots and the obdurate coloIlists justifies our aScribiIlg the Same purpose to them; the perpetuation of exploitation in Africa so as to apply a firm brake to the ever-increasing impoverishment of some of their trading partners whose lands are becoming 6~. hausted. 60. The Pretoria-Lisbon axis partners are outdoing eac1l in inflicting cruel outrages on the innocent people and doing injury to all mankind. Despite their individual peculiarities, despite the apparent differences between the policy of apartkid and the Portuguese policy of domination, the goal pursued by Pretoria and Lisbon hides one and the same reality: the systematic dehumanization and the shameles eXploitati0n of their fellow-men. 61. The preceding observations are corroborated beyond any doubt in the following statements. 62. First of all the revelations of Ian Smith in the Daily Mail of 19 July 1965. He stated that the establishment of increasingly closer tics between Rhodesia and the other Southern white States was regarded in Johannesburg as the beginning of closer association with the white States, Provision was even being made to create a powerful White bloc across the continent, from Angola in the, West to Mozambique in the cast. 63. Turning now to the theoretician of @artkid, we find a statement made by Verwocrd in August 1961 to the effect that the goal of the Nationalist Party, whatever it Iniglit have been in the past, was to ensure that the white man, and hence a white Government, stayed jn South Africa, 64. Thirdly, any number of quotations can be Produced from segregationist philosophy. Here are the words Of another Afrikaaner: “The history of the Afrikaaner reveals a determlllation and a ‘definiteness of purpose which make one fee1 t”at Afrikaanerdom is not the work of man but a creationof God. We have a Divine right to be Afrikaanerss Our 1 SW Calziers Lilted NOS. 27 and 28, Paris, FranFois Maspero’ 65, fie doctrine of apartheid is resoundingly echoed in *tier statements, such as one by the Calvinist theologian, m,Strauss, that the white Christian was vested with sffkisl authority over the native, who obey his orders. He must even endure punishment by the Christian in the name sfhe Lord because it delivered him from the slavery of sin. 71. 1 am reminded here of the excellent speech made by the. Secretary-General barely a week ago, in which he said that the United Nations was not only the hope of mankind, but the last hope of mankind. Those were not his precise words, but I believe I have captured their substance. He also said that the United Nations was what its Members made of it. Thus, SO long as certain Members do not seek ways and means of implementing the principles of the Charter and imposing the measures called for on recalcitrants such as Portugal, the Organization’s efforts will prove fruitless. 66, 1 have ventured to draw this parallel to illustrate the over.sll plot directed against Africa. To demonstrate the identity of South African apartheid with Portuguese cole&,l domination, we shall merely cite the statement made by the representative of Lisbon at the National Press Club in Washington the day before yesterday, Wednesday, 8 November 1967. The representative in question was the ester for Foreign Affairs, and the following salient points may be drawn from his address: 72. The Security Council will recall that Portugal’s attitude towards the United Nations has always been recalcitrant and that it has always scorned the many resolutions adopted by the various United Nations bodies, including those adopted in October 1966 and July 1967 condemning the mercenary activities instigated by Portugal. That same country is still today an incorrigible backslider. If it did not count on the approval and backing of the Powers it has won over, the Lisbon Government would never have dared to be so contemptuous of the Charter, which it has violated time and time again by its raids and by its morbid opposition to decolonization practices which lay bare its weaknesses in many areas. 67. In his view, Africans are congenitally incapable of governing themselves. They therefore have no claim whatever to independence. He lauds the establishment of the assimilados system, as if racial communion were a substitute for independence. But he forgets that independence is an inherent right, an inalienable right to self-determination, and not a gift or a favour to be solicited. It is clear from his speech that in his view, Africans have no other mission than to bow their heads eternally to the colonial yoke, a theory which thus coincides with that of the proponents of apartheid in South Africa. 73. If the Lisbon Government is to be forced to cease its provocations against neighbouring countries, the Security Council must adopt a resolution condemning any direct or indirect involvement with the mercenaries. Vigorous coercive measures against the Portuguese arsenal in Angola must be adopted to protect the targets in Portuguesedominated Africa against the growing arms menace. In the face of Portugal’s colossal guilt, both in colonial matters and in its attacks on the national sovereignty and territorial integrity of independent States, the Security Council might well exclaim, as did Cicero with regard to Catihne: “‘Quousque tandem abutere Catilina patientia nostra? ” men will Portugal stop defying the United Nations and trying its patience? 68. I should like at this point to make a few brief comments regarding racial policy, for it is essential to dispel any misunderstanding that might give the impression that the people enslaved by Portugal are ardently keen on association with the Portuguese white community. It is time to enlighten all who harboured such illusions. In point of fact, Africans are fully aware that they are complete personalities in their own right, In other words, Africans have no desire to assume a borrowed personality or some exotic citizenship to round out their development. The Afries% far from encouraging Portugal’s presumptuousness bY begging for racial rapprochement with his equal, his fellow-man, wishes for nothing more than to become master of his own fate, He is claiming his right to develop his cWn personality and to enjoy his own identity. 74. The members of the Security Council will readily agree that we need an international organization Of a stature commensurate with the individual and the universe, one capable of reducing to modest proportions that national egoism which is the major cause of the United Nations ineffectiveness. 69, The black man therefore has no need to masquerade in Portuguese colours to fulfi himself; and hence it would be s grave mistake for Portugal to believe that the assimilation PelieY till compensate for its refusal to grant independence sad that the African will be satisfied with that gift. The time has come to call the absurd bluff of seeking at all costs te turn the premises of absence of rights and inequality Professed by Portugal into administrative principles. 75. me PRESIDENT (translated from French): 1 am overwhelmed by the .very flattering words which the representative of Burundi has just addressed to me. 1 should like to thank him personally and on behalf of my delegation. 76. I now c~ upon the representative Of Zambia. 70. Finally, we must recognize that the world needs an iatemational organization of a stature commensurate with

Before addressing the Council, 1 should J&e to thank those delegations which have Gworth, Middlesex, Penguin Books, 1964. 79. Once again the Security Council is seized with the chronic problem of mercenaries in the Congo. My delegation feels that this matter should now be dealt with once and for all. 80. My delegation listened with deep regret to the eloquent account given at the 1372nd meeting by the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo with regard to the new invasion by a band of mercenaries from Angola, a Territory under Portuguese domination. 81. I will not bore this Council with an account of foreign interference in the internal affairs of the Congo since that country attained independence seven years ago, nor shall I bring back to memory the sufferings and misery of the people of the Congo. These facts are well known to the Security Council. 82. As everyone knows, the problem of mercenaries in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has been in existence since the days of the secessionist regime of Moi’se Tshombe. Since that time the Democratic Republic of the Congo has never known peace. There has been untold loss of life and property and unnecessary disruption of economic progress. 83. The question must be asked: whose interests are these mercenaries serving? Or are they, as some delegations here would want us to believe, mere adventurers and seekers of fortune? I will say, no. We would like to make it known that these white mercenaries did not fight for TshombB because they love him as an individual. They are fighting in defense of colonialism. They are fighting to keep the Congo under the control of the countries of their origin. They are fighting to prevent African States from -the free exercise of their independence and to perpetuate colonialism on the African continent. It is clear that these mercenaries have no interest in the welfare of the Congolese people. They are a gang of lunatics whose only objective is to destroy and kill in the interest of neo-colonialism. My delegation strongly condemns .the activities of mercenaries. Those who condone the activities of these international gangsters are in fact supporting colonialism. 84. I now turn to the recent acts of aggression perpetrated on 1 November 1967 against the Democratic Republic of the Congo by a band of mercenaries from Angola, a Territory under Portuguese domination which, as usual, the Government of Portugal has denied. It is hard for my delegation to believe that these mercenaries could have entered the Democratic Republic of the Congo from Angola without the knowledge of the Portuguese author- 85. Our conviction is further strengthened by a report which appeared in The New York Times on 4 November 1967 which reads: “Portugal denies that the mercenary force came from Angola, but the United States and other Western cove,,. ments have been accumulating evidence for weeks of its presence there. Washington was right to emph&e ‘strongly’ to Portugal its ‘grave disquiet’ over this &v&p ment .” The paper continues: “The thrust from Angola into Katanga is evidently linked to the presence in Bukavu of the forces led by the Belgian, Col. Jean Schramme . . , The ramifications of this latest development, if it is not checked quickly, couldbe very dangerous. Many Africans are convinced that the white minority regimes in South Africa, Rhodesia aad the Portuguese territories have been planning a power move against hostile African Governments to the north, They believe the invasion of the Congo represents a first step in that strategy.” 86. This condoning of mercenary activities by the Por tuguese authorities is a violation of Security Council resolution 226 (1966) which called upon the Government of Portugal: “, . . not to allow foreign mercenaries to use Angola as a base of operation for interfering in the domestic affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.” 87. My delegation, therefore, fully supports the demands made by the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo which are as follows: firstly, that the Security Council should condemn the Government of Portugal for its continued violation of Security Ccufld resolutions; secondly, that the Council should immediately call upon the Government of Portugal to respect scruPb lously resolution 239 (1967) of the Security Couacfi; and thirdly, that the Security Council should call on all States to ensure that no recruitment of mercenaries takes Placeofl their soil. These are the demands made by the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, aad my delegation hopes that the Council will take immediate action along these lines. 88. An attempt has been made here by a certain repr@ sentative to draw a comparison between the invasion bY mercenaries of the independent Democratic Republic Of t”e Congo and the racist rebellion regime in Southern Rhodesia. The only sensible comparison here is that both the rebels in Southern Rhodesia and the mercenaries in t”e Democratic Republic of the Congo have only one crimina’ intent; and that is to kill black people. Smith ia Southern Rhodesia uses violence to prevent the black People froln 90. Before I conclude, it should be stated emphatically that the people of Africa have suffered far too long from foreign domination and exploitation. All they want now is to be left alone in peace so that they cm build their own econolnies and political institutions. Besides, the people of Africa are faced with the great task of eradicating disease, illiteracy and poverty. III these endeavours they arc united. It is the firm hope of my delegation that the international community will do all it can to assist us in achieving these noble aspirations.

Canada has continually, in word and deed, supported LJnitecl Nations efforts to sustain the independence, territorial integrity and stability of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Canadian delegation supported, as did other members of the Security Couacil, resolution 239 (1967), which reaffirmed, in particular, paragraph 2 of Security Council resolution 226 (1966), calling on all States “to refrain or desist from intervening in the domestic affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.” In other words, we are against all outside meddling with the internal affairs of the sovereign Govennnent which has brought its complaint to the Council. 92. In its resolution 239 (1967) the Security Council also condemned any Government which persisted in providing facilities to mercenaries whose object Was to overtllroW the Government of a Member State. My delegation has listened with great care to the statement of the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo [I.VZnd meeting/. From his statement, including his reference to messages intercepted from the mercenaries in Bukavu asking for help from their associates in Angola, as well as other statements in the Council, in addition to information available in the Press concerning events in the Congo in the first days of this month, it would, in my judgement, be very difficult.to deny that additional mercenaries have appeared in the Congo and that this band of mercenaries came from Angola. 93. It is hard to imagine that this could have happened without at least the knowledge of the Portuguese authorities and one must conclude therefore that, despite the very clear language of previous Security Council resolutions, the Portuguese Government has in fact permitted mercenaries 94. The Canadian delegation wilI be guided in its attitude to any draft resolution brought before the Council by the considerations which I have outlined.

It is a matter of serious concern to my delegation that the Security Council should find it necessary to meet once again scarcely four months after it last considered the situation created by the intervention of foreign mercenaries in the domestic affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. My delegation is deeply disturbed by the recent grave situation which was brought to our attention in the document [S/8218/ which was presented to the CounciI by the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, who explained his Government’s charges that: “. . . mercenaries stationed in Angola launched an aggressive attack on our country on 1 November, l967.“[1372nd meeting, pura. 14.1 96. The Council certainly cannot condone any action taken by any Government, or any failure to act, that might have the effect of an intervention in the domestic affairs of another country. Such intervention, of course, would clearly contravene the principle of non-interference in the domestic affairs of sovereign States, which is firmly enshrined in international law and in the Charter. We also recall the Security Council resolution 239 (1967) of 10 July 1967, which: “Condemns any State which persists in permitting or tolerating the recruitment of mercenaries, and the provision of facilities to them, . . .“; and “CaZZs upon Governments to ensure that their territory and other territories under their control, as well as their nationals, are not used for the planning of subversion, and the recruitment, training and transit of mercenaries designed to overthrow the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo .” 97. We have listened very carefully to the statements made in the Council, including those of the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and of Portugal, whose contentions are diametrically opposed to each other, as has been the case in the past.’ It may indeed be very difficult to provide conclusive evidence on the question now before us. 98. We all know very well that the Congo has long been subjected to foreign interference and that the activities of foreign mercenaries for some years past have been a serious obstacle standing in the way of national unity and progress. The Council must act positively so that this young and dynamic African country may be able to live in peace, harmony and prosperity without external interference of any kind.

On behalf of my delegation, may I first of all thank you, Mr. President, and the members of the Council for the privilege of participating in this debate. 100. My statement not only reflects a natural feeling of solidarity but also stems from the fact that Algeria was designated by the African delegations to join Burundi and Zambia in putting forward the African point of view on the question now before the Council. 101. We meet here once again to discuss a problem which, like many others, shows the level of degradation to which international relations have sunk and reveals the barely disguised contempt of certain well-known rowers for the Third World and its ideals. We believe it is hardly necessary to point out that the picture of these mercenaries as the last adventurers of our time clumsily disguises a return to gunboat diplomacy which, however short-lived it may be, could one day spark off the dramatic chain reaction we all dread. 102. The time has come to state the facts clearly, Either the so-called mercenaries have no nationality and are not the responsibility of any State, in which case it is inadmissible that such common criminals should be the object of a supposedly humanitarian concern when their adventures have come to an end; or else they deserve assistance through virtue of the protection which every State owes to its nationals. In that case it should, in future, be clearly established that the responsibility of the Powers concerned is involved in this kind of enterprise. In any case, we must immediately put an end to such activities, which 104. At the political level, in any event, the true respcn sibihties have been placed. Ever since 1960, when the first mercenaries arrived in the Congo, there have been constan comings and goings, and it is not without significance aat in 1963, at the time of the failure of the secession ol Katanga, the mercenaries largely sought refuge in Angelan territory, while last July their leaders took refuge ii, Rhodesia. 105. Although Portugal has denied the Congolese version of the events, it is nevertheless curious to note the form that the denial has taken. Expressions like “There is no truth in the Congolese allegations . . .“, no doubt imply that the truth exists even if it is not exactly in agreemen with the Congolese representative’s statements. Or we are told: “No group of mercenaries has crossed the frontier between Angola and the Congo.” This could mean that such groups of mercenaries might have used other routes with Portugal’s assistance, or it might mean that such groups had in fact crossed the frontier, but that they were not explicitly labelled as mercenaries. 106. The obvious result of such action is to cause concern for the development of international co-operation such as the Congo practises and is attempting to extend. 107. A number of resolutions have already been adopted by the Security Council. Most of these resolutions, which have been constantly violated, prohibit the countries is which mercenaries are recruited from providing facilitiesby which recruitment might be intensified. 108. In this connexion, we are bound to point cut that the measures taken so far by certain Governments, ahhO@ positive in themselves, are bound to prove ineffective until and unless they are applied universally through the con certed action of all States, especially the European States from which the mercenaries come, and until and unless the reign of extremist colonialism is brought to an end Once and for all and the reactionary strongholds of Rhodesia and the Portuguese colonies are destroyed. 109. The day before yesterday certain persons, Whom We should like to give the benefit of the doubt, saw fit to “Be measures which would restrict the capacity of countries’ like the Congo, which find their security Perinsnently threatened to defend themselves and to retaliate* We should not’ be surprised at such proposals: they represent country* l]], in order to prevent SUC~I 11 recurrence, the Congo is eatit]ed, with African assistance if need be, to take hlnediate measures to deal with mercenary activities, Through the pathological fixation created by the bogus evacuation problem, precious time has been gained, doubtless b order to permit new infiltrations of mercenaries and prevent any government action to suppress them. It must be stated plainly that the very presence of these pseudo “defenders of the West” in the Congo constitutes in itself aa act of aggression. There is no attempt to conceal their aims: they intend to challenge once again the independence, sovereignty and integrity of the Congo. In order to do so, they need to bring about a state of insecurity, or at least to see to it that the situation in the Congo is regarded as insecure. 117. In conclusion, Mr. President, I should like to say that Algeria rejoices in the victories achieved by its Congolese brothers in their legitimate struggle for political amI economic liberation, The solution to ali the problems lies in. steadfast resistance. Only by following a progressive policy can the Congo be liberated from all foreign influence and from the policies of blackmail exercised by certain Powers, and play its allotted role in a united and independent Africa. 118. It is against this background and in this spirit that Algeria offers its total and unconditional support to the Congolese people and their Government. 112, To keep to the main point only, it will be remembered that since the early days of its independence, the Congo has continuously been a pawn in imperialist rivalries and the victim of foreign intervention; from the very start, tile aim of the imperialists has been to put a stop to the liberation movement in the Congo and to gain control over its political and economic future. This policy has created an undesirable situation from which the entire Congolese people have suffered,

The Danish delegation shares the deep regret and great concern expressed by other members that the Security Council should have to deal once again with the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, due to the intolerable activities of mercenaries and to interference from outside in the affairs of that country, It is not the first time that the territorial and political integrity of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has been violated by outside forces. Fortunately, it seems as if the latest incident has been contained, but to us the aims and origin of such operations imply a dangerous trend. Any country which tolerates that armed bands, intent upon instrusion into another country, should be organized in and operate from territories under its control violates the purposes and principles of the United Nations as expressed in Articles 1 and 2 of its Charter. 113. It is the wealth of the Congo which is at the root of the covetousness and interference of foreign Powers, particularly in the form of military invasions as in the case of Stanleyville, and more recently of intervention in political and economic affairs involving the sovereignty of the Congo. Although imperialism has been wont to adapt its methods to meet the needs of the moment, it nevertheless remains essentially true to itself. This means that tllese same imperialists have not given up all hope of stamping out the liberation movements in places like Africa. Today, their conflicting interests have turned the Coago into a hotbed of unrest, and it is the Congolese People who are the main victims. This striving to maintain selfish interests is at the root of the recent events. 120, Such behaviour, furthermore, violates specific resolutions of this Council. I refer, of course, to resolution 226 (1966) and resolution 239 (1967). The former urged the Government of Portugal not to dew foreign mercenaries to use Angola as a base of operation for interfering in the domestic affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the latter called upon governments in general to ensure that their territory and other territories under their control were not used for the planning of subversion and the recruitment, training and transit of mercenaries designed to overthrow the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 114. ‘There are two sides to this explanation: first of all, the Presence in Africa of colonialism and of racist rigimes, which are a permanent source of danger, for the fact that the mercenary bases are situated mainly in Portuguese Terdtories while their supplies, assistance and shelter are provided by Southern Rhodesia and South Africa, reveals c]ear]~ the relationship between the presence of colonialism in Africa and the periodic outbreaks which threaten the sovereignty of the Congo, its territorial integrity and its national unity. 121. So much for the legal aspects of the matter. 122. me political aspects, however, are perhaps even less auspicious, The border between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Angola is not only a national border; it is a border between two worlds. North of it are the free 115* Secondly, we must realize that as long as Portugal Persists in its policy in Angola and Mozambique, and as 123. I listened with great interest to the statement made on 8 November [1372nd meeting] by the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I was impressed by the case he presented, as well as by the significant support it has received from other representatives in the course of our debate. Against that background it would seem to be difficult to doubt that a new incursion of armed groups into the Democratic Republic of the Congo has taken place. We must insist that the repeated appeals of this Courtcil for non-intervention in the inter&l affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo be scrupulously heeded by all Governments, and we find that a very special obligation must rest upon the neighbours of the Congo to ensure that the adjacent territories are not abused, in contravention of the resolutions of this Council. 124. The Democratic Republic of the Congo has already for far too long been exposed to disturbances from outside. Those disturbances must be brought to an end. We support the endeavours of the Congolese Government to restore full authority in its country. It must now be allowed to pursue unhampered the peaceful development of the Congo. The responsibility of the Security Council in that connexion seems very clear. 125. Mr, TARABANOV (Bulgaria) (translated from French): Mr, President, on behalf of the delegation of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria, I should like to offer you my most sincere and hearty congratulations. In you we salute the representative of an independent African State, a country whose inavaluable and active contribution to the work of this Organization is well known, a country with which Bulgaria maintains close ties of friendship and co-operation. Through you we also salute the freedom fighters of the national liberation movement who are struggling to free the African peoples from the colonial yoke and to establish and stab&e the independence they have regained. The Bulgarian delegation will give you its full co-operation, both as President of this Council and as a dear friend, in carrying out your duties and responsibilities. 126. The facts related to us by the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mr. Umba Di Lutete, in the succinct statement he made at the meeting on Wednesday, 8 November [1372nd meeting/, are most disturbing. They show that the forces of colonialism and oppression have again seen fit to disturb peace in Africa by intervening in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The concerted efforts of the African countries to cope with the African situation and stabilize the independent African States, one of the most notable of which was the Conference of the Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity held at Kinshasa in September 1967, do not seem to be to the liking of some who are in the habit of fishing in troubled waters. / diversionary tactics which can, of course, deceive no one, / 128. Even the leading newspapers, which as a rule tend to / be favourable towards the activities of colonialist and imperialist circles, are obliged to report the facts concerning interventionist activities which are not only tolerated by the Portuguese authorities, but in which they have seen& to become willing accomplices. There is a report to that effect this very day in The New York Times: “Portugal, Rhodesia and Belgian big business prefer to stimulate chaos-which requires minimal effort here.“3 “Here” refers to the Congo, where apparently such activities may stir up trouble. No doubt the recruitment, training and dispatching of mercenaries to the Congo require only minimal efforts on the part of the colonialists, but it permits them to maintain a state of extreme tension in that vast country, the favorite prey of all business and international financial circles. To maintain unrest in the Congo, an immense country in the heart of Africa, is to keep the whole of Africa in a state of extreme tension. Such a situation appears to be very advantageous to the great colonial monopolies, which are accustomed to organizing their despicable affairs under cover of such situations. 129. However, it apparently is difficult for Portugal ta deny the smallest favour to the great international financial monopolies operating in Africa. Did it not, in fact, receive from the Angola Diamond Company, a company which exploits the mineral wealth of its colony, about 125 million1 escudos in exchange for a concession of more than cat million square kilometres in the African Territory under it!; colonial domination? It need hardly be said that those who provide the financial backing for the Angola Dimoa(l Company, as well as the other monopolies set uP aad operating in Angola, undoubtedly have a vested interest ifl seeing disorder reign in the Congo and are ready, if necessary, to help to bring it about. 130. Confronted with such overwhelming evidence as that presented by the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Dem’ cratic Republic of the Congo concerning PQrtugal’s co’* lusion and its responsibility for the attempts made by t’l” mercenaries to disturb the peace and. the way of life Of th” Congo, even the closest friends of Portugal-at the Same time the leaders of the Atlantic alliance, without wllose military assistance Portugal would not even dream of carrying out its enterprises or sharing in themycfm n” longer hesitate to recognize the responsibility of their ‘ly’ though they seek to minimize it. 3 Quoted in English by the speaker. At the same meeting the United Kingdom representative ssid that a new contingent of mercenaries had been sent from Angola to the Congo, and went on: “It is and was a clear duty of the Portuguese Govemmerit to take every possible measure to prevent any force from assembling in Angolan territory or using Angola as a base.“[Ibid., PUKL 64.1 “The second request I would make . . . is a reaffirmation of the Security Council’s previous resolutions concerning this matter, particularly resolution 226 (1966) of 14 October 1966, and resolution 239 (1967) of 10 July 1967. 132. There can therefore be no doubt of the Portuguese Government’s responsibility in the case in point, especially in view of the admissions by Portugal’s allies. Even allies as close as the United Kingdom and the United States cannot deny the facts, though they try to tone down the presentation of them. 133. In his statement today, the Portuguese representative did not refute any of the charges levelled against his country, much as he tried to do so. He did, however, raise certain points relating to foreign monopolies. It will be interesting to see whether these points are raised by the interested parties of whom he spoke. The Deputy Foreign Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo asked some very pertinent questions which I should like to quote. At the meeting of 8 November he asked: “In the relations between Portugal and some of the great Western Powers are there not, unfortunately, some disturbing elements, proof of which may be seen by what is happening in SO-called Portuguese Africa? ” [Ibid., para. 3X] Previously, he had asked another very pertinent question: “How is it that such large bands of mercenaries can leave their cou,ltry, pass through Lisbon, arrive in Angola and continue their training there? In short, who pays them? In the end, who reaps the benefit of these crimes? ” [Ibid., para. 34.j 134. The sponsors of NATO, whose testimony regarding Portugal’s guilt I quoted just now, have evaded the questions which the distinguished representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo wished to clear up, and with good reason, since to reply to them would mean seeking the responsibility on their own doorstep. 135. In point of fact, the principal monopolies operating in Africa enjoy for the most part a considerable measure of Participation or the complete protection of American and British capital. If we wished to go into all the ramifications of responsibilities we would have to penetrate to the very root of the matter and call for an end to the exploitation of the African peoples by foreign monopolies, which, of course, operate with the complicity of Portugal but which also enjoy the protection of the countries whence their “My third request to the Council is a condemnation of the whole principle of mercenary armies,” /Ibid., paras. 39 and 40.1 137. Mercenary activities are one of Africa’s constant scourges. Other speakers have merely spoken of the purpose served by the mercenaries, how they are employed and how international finance makes use of them, We believe that the Security Council should take appropriate action and that the action should be strictly enforced wherever the mercenaries are found and regardless of who is making use of them. 138. The Congolese representative further asked “that countries which have privileged relations with Portugal should decline to support it in its undertakings” [Ibid., para. 411. We know which these countries are; they must be able to effectively force Portugal to cease its present activities. They will, of course, have to take really serious measures, and th.ey can put an end to these activities if they so wish. Finally, the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo asked that the countries of origin of certain mercenaries “should take the necessary measures to prevent those mercenaries from using their regular channels to make another foray”, once they had left Bukavu [Ibid., paw. 431. 139. Obviously, we approve and support these requests which were presented to the members of the Security Council by the Congolese representative. However, in my delegation’s opinion, such decisions and measures are not likely to eliminate the ills troubling Africa and the Congo which is the heart of Africa. In osder to bring this dangerous situation to an end, it is obviously necessary to force Portugal to respect the resolutions of the Security Council and the decisions of the United Nations. But we must also put an end to the malevolent activities of the international monopolies that have organized the colonial exploitation of the African peoples by such means and are keeping it alive. 140. However, these are only palliatives. In order that such happenings and attempts no longer disturb the peace in Africa or cause interference in the domestic affairs of African States, and so that these activities do not recur, all the organs of the United Nations, including particularly the 141. In conclusion, I wish to state that the delegation of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria will support any effective measures proposed to the Security Council within the scope of the question now before us, to eliminate mercenaries and mercenary activities from the political scene in the Congo and the whole of Africa.

In the name of my country and on my own behalf I wish to thank the representative of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria for the very kind and encouraging words he has just addressed to my country and to me.

Mr. President, I should like to associate myself with the good wishes expressed to you as President of the Council. 144. For the third time within the space of a year the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has complained that its independence and territorial integrity are threatened by foreign mercenaries from a neighbouring territory. 14.5. Foreign intervention is, of course, no new thing for the Congo. In one form or another it has been with that unhappy Republic ever since the day of its independence. Only recently, foreign mercenaries have caused much ruin and destruction in the province of Bukavu. No sooner had the mercenaries in Bukavu been defeated than a new contingent of them arrived in Katanga. That the Democratic Republic of the Congo, seven and a half years after its independence, should continue to be subjected to external interference is a matter that cannot be viewed with unconcern by the Security Council, which has been seized of the question of foreign intervention in the Congo since the middle of 1960. 146. In the complaint of the Government of the Congo, it has charged that the mercenaries who have invaded Katanga have come from the Portuguese territory of Angola. If so, clearly the Portuguese authorities have not acted in accordance with the injunctions of this Council which, in resolution 239 (1967) adopted on 10 July 1967, over four months ago, condemned “any State which persists in permitting or tolerating the recruitment of mercenaries, and the provision of facilities to them, with the objective of overthrowing the Governments of States Members of the United Nations”. That resolution also specifically called upon “Governments to ensure that their territory and o&her territories under their control, as well as their nationals, are not used for the planning of subversion, and the recruitment, training and transit of mercenaries designed to overthrow the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo”. 147. The terms of that resolution are clear enough. Obviously the Government of Portugal has the clear duty to prevent any band of armed men from using the territory of 148. From the very start of its involvement in the affairs of the Congo, the United Nations has always been guided by the following principles: the unity, territorial integrity and political independence of the Congo must be preserved the Congo must not be a battleground for rival ideologies; and the Congolese people must be given the opportunity to develop their own institutions and resources in their ow,, way free from external interference. Those principles should continue to guide the deliberations of the Council ia regard to the present complaint. 149. In the opinion of my delegation, the Council should give careful consideration to the suggestions made by tile Deputy Foreign Minister of the Congo in his statement ea 8 November /1372nd meeting/ so that the danger posed by the mercenaries to his country will be eliminated once ad for all. It goes without saying that all countries, particularly those bordering on the Congo, have a grave responsibility to carry out both the spirit and letter of the resolutions oftlie Security Council in regard to the mercenary problem and that failure to do so merits the strongest censure of the world community.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the exercise of his right of reply. 15 1. Mr. UMBA DI LUTETE (Democratic Republic of the Congo) (translated front French): I should like to thank you, Mr. President, for allowing me to speak at this late hour. In my last statement to the members of the Council [1372 meeting], I apologized for having to refer once again to a speech where there was nothing of substance to be criticized or repeated in summary form. However, after having heard the statements made by the various members of the Council, I feel I ought to clear up a few points of confusion which may have arisen as a result of the statements by the Portuguese representative. 152. First of all, although this may sound paradoxical11 should like to express to the members of the Council mY sincere admiration for Mr. de Miranda, the Portuguese representative, Mr. de Miranda is an excellent speaker and a man of parts. At the same time I sympathize with him in the position in which he is placed. I have the feeling that he has been sent here with instructions to defend any cause) even if he does not believe in it. What can he do in the face of the confusion in which his Government finds itself, Or at least appears to find itself at the present? Some time ago we likewise heard the statements made in Washington Over a television network by Mr. Nogueira, the Foreign Minister of Portugal, and we are also familiar with the statements made more recently by the Portuguese Ambassador to the United States, Mr. Garin; I do not propose to make tiy further comment on those statements. In my ownsPeeclll 153. It was the work of undisciplined gangs, and the highest authorities in the Republic intervened immediately the news reached them. We at once apologized to the Government at Lisbon. I do not know whether the Portuguese representative was told about ,it, but we did in fact present our apologies at the time. We did what we could by ordering a thorough investigation, and the persons responsible were imprisoned. In due course, when the Portuguese Charge d’affaires returned to Kinshasa, we received a note acknowledging that the Congolese Government had in fact done its best to nip the affair in the bud. Lat,er on, when a group of young people tried to stage a demonstration, the President of the Republic himself appeared on the scene to calm down the demonstrators. I very much doubt whether such solicitude would be found in other countries. Unfortunately, in some countries such scenes are daily occurrences. As a matter of fact, what happened on the very day when the much-talked of resolution 226 (1966) was adopted? In a country as well organized as this one, in which the police forces and the Government’s information channels are so efficient, what happened? The tragic incident which I do not wish to dwell on now. I mention these things in order to show that the regrettable incident involving the Portuguese Embassy should not be viewed as anything more than the actions of undisciplined gangs such as are to be found, unfortunately, in any country. 154. Secondly, we are told that the actions of the Congolese Government are prompted by anti-Portuguese feelings. But does the Portuguese representative know how many Portuguese are at present living peacefully in the Congo, carrying on their businesses and earning their living? How often have these people been disturbed? Yet in his anxiety to provide firmer proof of the alleged anti-Portuguese feelings of the Congolese Government, the Portuguese representative accuses us of harbouring these kwkw 155. Here are the facts. Various United Nations bodies, including the General Assembly, have adopted countless resolutions to induce Portugal to decolonize. What has been the result of all those resolutions? Absolutely nothing. On the contrary, the Angolans have been subjected to barbaric repression-that is the only word for it. What means have the Angolans for defending themselves against the rockets, the guns and the planes used by Lisbon? Their only defence is flight. And where do they flee? To us. The various commissions of the Organization of African Unity that have visited the Congo ‘have been able to see for themselves the wretched condition of all the people who have fled and abandoned their country to an invader and an 1.57. When in his statement on 8 November [1372nd meeting] the Portuguese representative denied our accusation, he said that the letter of our Foreign Minister was the only foundation upon which we cobld base our claim that there were mercenaries in Angola; and to prove that there were none, he merely quoted a statement of the Portuguese Government. Fine proof indeed! The existence of mercenary camps in Angola and the fact that the mercenary contingent which has just attacked us came from Angola are now an open secret. All who have spoken here, even though they spoke in veiled terms so as to cover themselves vis-&is a country which is after all their friend, had to recognize that these bands of mercenaries came from Angola. We are not the only ones to state this fact. 1%. When we submit photographs to the Council, Portugal says they are faked and mean absolutely nothing. When I submit this letter, to which I should once again like to draw the Security Council’s attention, what does Portugal say? That it is a forgery. What did the Portuguese representative say when he took the floor just now? That I should retract certain things I have said which, according to him, showed ill-will towards his Government. By saying that I submitted a forgery, the Portuguese representative is accusing my delegation of fraud. I hope that, being a man of honour, he will see fit to withdraw that allegation. In any case, as far as I am concerned, here is the letter. If the Portuguese representative still wishes to contend that it is a forgery, all he need do is communicate with the Belgian Foreign Ministry which was kind enough to provide our Ambassador in Brussels with the document of which this is a photocopy. But do we really need to dwell any longer on what the Portuguese representative said? We know what to believe and what not to believe. 159. I should like now to refer to what the Portuguese representative said a few moments ago. According to him, the various mercenaries whose names have been cited are not of Portuguese nationality. But we are not particularly concerned whether they are of Portuguese nationality or not. That is unimportant. Whether the Lisbon Government gave them planes or not is also unimportant. Again the Portuguese representative has tried to confuse the issue by mentioning a whole list of States which are involved. Naturally, the States which have nationals among the mercenaries are also involved. Our charge against Portugal is that it has abjectly turned a blind eye to the mercenaries’ utilization of Angola as a training base from which they could eventually launch their attack on the Democratic Republic of the Congo. These are the grounds for our charge. 16 1. The incident in question was that among the planes transporting arms was one whose registration was irregular. The United States Ambassador apparently drew the attention of the Lisbon Government to the fact. What did the Lisbon Government do about it? The Portuguese representative should have told us. The plane was simply repainted, and it rejoined the others with regular registrations. What must we conclude from that? 162. I shall say nothing more. But at least, Mr. President, let me look at you and the members of this Council straight in the face. In doing so, I should like particularly to draw the Council’s attention to the responsibilities that it has assumed. I was pleased to hear the United Kingdom representative stressing the Council’s responsibility. Many of the succeeding speakers expressed the same view. 163. The representative of Algeria just now emphasized the low level to which international relations have fallen. It is curious to note that some things we condemn, or which we condemn in certain circumstances, have ceased to trouble the consciences of certain people through frequent repetition. Blood has flowed and continues to flow, and some nre content to do no more than express their concern! 164. Everyone recognizes that Angola has been used as an operational base for the attack on my country, and yet there is a refusal to admit that this is an aggression. We refuse to condemn Portugal or to draw the logical conclusions from such a situation. This is a serious matter. 16.5. However, I would like to thank the Government of the United States for having made representations to the Portuguese Government as soon as it heard the news. The Belgian Government did likewise for the sake of the safety of its nationals. 166. I should fike to repeat what I said to the members of this Council on 8 November. The resolution for which I am asking is not an end in itself, but a means. We seek rlothing but peace so that we can work and feed our children, so that the foreigners among us may live and prosper, so that our fields may yield their produce, so that our infrastructure can remain as it is, and so that we may bring up our children in peace and tranquillity. We ask nothing else. We are asking only that this Council should undertake the energetic measures which the current situation logically requires. It is pointless to haggle: either we recognize that a situation exist& or we do not; if it exists, appropriate measures must be taken to deal with it. 168. Perhaps this may not come within the direct or exclusive competence of this Council, but in this way the Members of the United Nations would be informed’of the suggestion I wish to make: would it not be possible for these mercenaries who attack Governments to be declared criminals against humanity and for international organ&- lions swh as INTERPOL to pursue and arrest them wherever they are found? Such a measure, if it could be taken si1imltaneously with the others which I have requested, would be perhaps not a decisive step, but at least a first step in the struggle I believe must be carried out against these shameful events which everyone regards as detestable. 169. This is what I wished to say. I am sorry to have kept the Council for so long, but I felt it my duty to speak as I have done,

I call on the representative of Portugal to speak in exercise of his right of reply.

Let me begin by thanking the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo for the amiable words he said about my personal qualities; it was very kind of him, Since I am thanking him, I must immediately proceed to thank him also for a valuable piece of information that he has given us, namely, that tlte Belgian document he mentioned in his speech last Wednesday was actually supplied to him by the Belgian Government. 172. Havittg said that, I must make a few remarks about the points he raised, and I must immediately reject what he called “barbarous repression” that he alleged was going on in Angola. There is no barbarous oppression in Angola although that fable has often been trotted out. Probably, and this is quite understandable, the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo is referring to the repression of the infiltrating murderers who cross into Angola from the Congo, If he means that, then of course I must tell him that the Portuguese authorities have a duty to protect the populations of Angola and cannot but take the necessary security measures. 173. Next, he again mentioned the exhibits. In connexion with the photos, he attributed to me an intention which I did not have. I certainly did not mean to say that the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo was trying to deceive the Council. When I said that photographs might be faked, I meant actually that. Photographs might be faked by anybody and they might be palmed off. They might have been passed off on the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Co%% who might have accepted them in good faith and produced them for the Council. In fact, all that I said amounts to 175. But I did so with expres: reservations. I mentioned most explicitly that we do not take our arguments from The New York Times, or from any newspaper for that matter. Therefore, we do not accept all that a newspaper says, even if it be the very respectable New York Times. We do not take everything as the truth. Therefore, the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo can draw no argument frbm my remarks about The New York Times. 176. However, the most important point which he raised is about the bases supposed to be existing in Angola for illicit activities against the Congo. I must draw the attention of the Council, first, to the fact that not a shred of evidence has been produced here that there are bases in Angola. Not a shred of evidence has been produced here that there have been infiltrations from Angola into the Congo. Even the famous Belgian letter does not say that there were infiltrations from Angola into the Congo. All that the Belgian letter says is that some sick and wounded refugees were evacuated to Angola. 177. There has not been, therefore, even a shadow of evidence brought here about the supposed infiltrations of any mercenaries from Angola into the Congo. If I understood aright, the members of the Council who spoke 178. I certainly did mention the statement issued by my Government. In fact, I could do no better. As I pointed out in my second statement last Wednesday /1372nd meeting] I regard that statement, and I feel that the Council must regard that statement, as made by a responsible Government, with a full sense of responsibility. I repeat what I said last Wednesday. 179. Now, if I am asked to prove what is contained in that statement, I must say that I am unable to prove what does not exist. If there are no bases, if there are no mercenaries, I cannot prove what has never existed. One can only prove what exists. Therefore, I reiterate here what I said last Wednesday: that there are no bases, that there are no mercenaries. If there should be any doubt about the truth of this statement, I reiterate here what I said last Wednesday. The Council is welcome to investigate.

I have no more speakers on my list. On the basis of consultations I have held, it appears that the members of the Council are in favour of setting the date for our next meeting on the complaint of the Democratic Republic of the Congo for Tuesday, 14 November, at 3.30 p.m. If there is no objection, I shall take it that this suggestion is adopted. The meeting rose at 7.lOp.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations publicotionr,may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications der Notions Unies rant en vente dons tes librairies et ler q gences dCporitairer du monde entier. Informer-vous aupr&r de votre librairie ou adresser-vour b: Nations Unier, Section der venter, New York ou Genbve. KAK IlOJY’iMTb M3AAHMFl OPTAHM3AUHM 06bEAMHEHHblX HAULIn 1I:r~nlllrrr Oprallll3ar~nn 06w&lrliclrlrr,Ix IIaqnir nIoEill0 KylIlITh n I(IIII;EllI>IX ~1ara31111ax n ~LrCllT(!TllilX 110 BCCX pnl”lOll~X ~1liplL ~hBO&llTC CIlp2lWI 06 1l3~allllfIX II BaBICM lillIlilillOY xaraxmc II.III III~IIIIITC IIO a4pecp : Opramaqm OiheArmmihlx IIaqir~“~, Cmiqw 1x0 ~~pO@UiC 113j4~11Ill”f, ~thO-~OpN A.lll &m3XL COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Los publicacioner de lar Nacioner Unidar ertirn en venta en librerias y cosas distribuidoras en todor parles del mundo. Consulte o SIJ librero o dirijase a: Naciones Unidar, Secci6n de Yentas, Nuevo York o Ginebra. Litho in U.N. Price: $U.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies) 356S3-December 1970-2,100