S/PV.1408 Security Council

It is extremely disturbing to note that, although the Council has only just concluded its discussion of the illegal and tyrannical domination of the people of South West Africa by a white racist minority, we are again called upon to discuss essentially the same problems concerning Zimbabwe, or Southern Rhodesia. It is really astonishing to see to what extent the racist regimes of South Africa and Southern Rhodesia are following the same policies; but it is far more disturbing to see the marked resemblance in the attitude taken by some Powers to those two rCgimes, since the sternness of the language used in both cases is accompanied by remarkable lack of action, 3. As we all know, the racists of Salisbury, like those of Pretoria, are constantly talking about defending the values of Western civilization. By so doing, they are trying to obtain the support of those in other continents who are pursuing a policy of domination and intervention. We regret to note that the obvious motives of the racists of Salisbury and Pretoria are welcomed with understanding in some Western countries. 4. In considering the latest pseudo-juridical murders committed by the illegal rCgime of Ian Smith, we must stress that the Council cannot confine its deliberations solely to the revolting executions of the Zimbabwe patriots. The Smith regime makes no secret of its intention to commit other crimes of the same kind. About 100 Zimbabwe patriots sentenced to death some years ago are now waiting for a clique of racist settlers to decide whether or not they will be executed for the crime of having fought for the genuine independence of their country. 5. Although this intolerable situation has persisted for years, some people pour out soothing statements about the true intentions of Ian Smith and his accomplices. But the facts speak for themselves and belie the promises and assurances of those who would have us believe that patience and understanding will eventually force the fascists of Salisbury to give way. We do not believe that the Smith clique will abandon its policy of deportation and execution because the events of the past have convinced US that appeasement and compromise with fascists lead only to the same kind of disastrous results that we have still fresh in our minds. 7. The fact that the repeated resolutions of the General Assembly have not been carried out by the British Government and that its delegation has done everything in its power to prevent the Security Council from adopting truly effective sanctions against the rebels can only convince Ian Smith and his friends that the United Kingdom and its allies will frustrate any effort that might lead to the result desired by the overwhelming majority of our Organization. I regret to have to add that the statement made in this debate by the United Kingdom representative has shown us that his country continues to pursue a policy which contains nothing constructive. 8. The second factor is that the attitude taken by the British Government is faithfully followed by its allies in NATO. While these countries verbally denounce the fascists of Salisbury, they continue to help to maintain them in existence. Allow me to refer to the statement in the British weekly, the New Statesman, which says in its issue of 8 March of this year, quoting publications of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, that trade between the Smith regime and the Federal Republic of Germany and other NATO countries has considerably increased since the so called “selective” sanctions were decided upon by the Security Council. It is significant to note that, as the Soviet Union representative showed at the 1400th meeting when he quoted an official statement of the Berlin Government, the German Democratic Republic has adopted a position which is diametrically opposed to that of West Germany. One may rightly wonder what miracle produced the curious results of those sanctions. For example, industrial production in Southern Rhodesia was 6.5 per Cent higher in 1967 than in 1966 and in the past two years the establishment of 4.50 industrial enterprises has been approved in the Territory. Those figures are taken from the Financial Times of 2 January 1968. The Secretary-General’s report of 30 November 1967 [8/7781/Add.4/ gives more precise and detailed infor- 9. A third and equally important factor is the role played by South Africa and Portugal in helping their allies in Salisbury, Everyone knows what efforts these three bastions of colonialism and racialism have made to curb progress in Africa. It would be unnecessary to quote figures to prove the crucial role which South Africa and Portugrtl have played in their efforts to protect the Salisbury r&me from the effects of the sanctions decided upon by the Security Council, which, moreover, were hr too limited. The nefarious alliance of these forces of darkness against national independence movements has often been pointed out. We find it significant that the members of this unholy alliance continue to maintain close links with the leading members of NATO, who never tire of explaining to us the spiritual values which unite them. 10. It is well known that a large number of the Members of the United Nations, including the socialist countries, have conscientiously carried out the decisions of United Nations organs. My country, for example, informed the Secretary-General on 6 March 1967: “The Government of the Hungarian People’s Republic has implemented fully the provisions of Security Council resolution 232 (1966) and actually went beyond them long before the adoption of the said resolution, Hungary is not among the countries having export or import trade with Southern Rhodesia.” [See S/7781/Add.2, annex.] 11. This is how the socialist countries intend to defend the interests of the Zimbabwe people and to help them achieve true independence. We are in favour of total sanctions against the Smith regime and it is not we who have been delaying them for years. There can be no question of the responsibility of some Western countries for the maintcnance of the fascist rCgime of Salisbury. These countries have protected the Ian Smith clique against the consequences of truly effective sanctions. Their moral and actual responsibility for the murder of the Zimbabwe patriots is also well established. 12. In view of the circumstances, expressions of despair are often heard. We are told that nothing can be done. We refuse to accept that. We do not deny that the policy which the United Kingdom and its allies have pursued for years has created a very serious situation which calls for strong measures. The execution of the Zimbabwe patriots has revolted world public opinion; but however barbaric those executions were, they are only a sympton of a verY dangerous situation. It is the existence of an illegal r&imc which is the main problem. Consequently the Hungarian delegation considers that: First, the universal indignation of the members of the Council, and indeed of all mankind, should be reflected in decisive action, namely, the application of the severest possible sanctions against the criminal 13. The Hungarian delegation would support any steps which would make it possible to achieve those objectives,

I call on the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Zambia. 1.5. Mr. KAMANGA (Zambia): Mr. President, the first task of my delegation this afternoon is to express our sincere congratulations on your assumption of the Presidency of this important organ of the United Nations. We are fully convinced that under your wise and able leadership the proceedings of the Council on the grave situation in Southern Rhodesia will be crowned with success. 16. My second task is to welcome Deputy Foreign Minister and Ambassador Malik of the Soviet Union who is here as the representative of one of the greatest Powers of our times. It is a great pleasure for me to welcome him in view of the close and friendly ties which exist between the people and Government of the Soviet Union and the people and Government of Zambia. It is in this context that my delegation believes that the Soviet delegation, led by this experienced diplomat, will make a substantial contribution to the solution of the problem now before the Council. 17. The Security Council is holding this urgent meeting at the request of African countries to consider the deterioration of an already serious situation in Rhodesia. The emotions of anger and anguish which the illegal hanging of five Africans by the racist minority regime in that country has engendered have quite properly been felt by all civilized mankind, which stands now shocked by a nightmare that, with appropriate action, could earlier have been prevented. It is, therefore, right and proper that this event should remind the United Nations, and particularly the Council, of the basic and abhorrent evilness of racism in the establishing of political systems, and should emphasize the need for effective measures to be taken to eliminate discrimination such as that based on race and oppression and exploitation of man by man throughout the world. 18. My delegation has not asked to be allowed to address this urgent meeting on the degenerating situation in Rhodesia only on the basis of Zambia’s proximity to that country; it has done so also, and even more, because now, more than ever before, we are convinced, even as all our previous predictions have since come true, that the day is not far off-unless Britain can even at this late hour take apprapriate action-when the whole situation will be completely out of hand and will engulf not only innocent civilians on the frontiers between Rhodesia and neighbouring African independent countries, but, Wib-ndlY, will, 20.. Needless to say I am, on behalf of my Government, equally moved by and grateful to many other members around this table who have come out strongly against the barbaric events of the last few weeks, and those still going on in Rhodesia. Acknowledgement is due, too, to all those who have recognized the special plight into which the illegal acts of Smith and his henchmen have thrown my peaceloving and still developing young nation, The extreme hardships into which geography and the British colonial policies of the previous decades have thrown us were enough to break any but the most courageous of leaders, which, of course, my President under the fast deteriorating situation, tries hard to continue to be. The sacrifices which the people of Zambia are called upon to make spell for them misery and discomfort which strain the very political and economic fabrics through which the leadership hoped to consolidate their people’s hard-won independence and freedom. 21. The opposition in Rhodesia to a black participation in Government has taken on such arrogance and contempt that it now presents the most negative threat to our deliberately balanced policy of humanism, which is without distinction as to race or colour. What kind of threat Smith poses for the rest of the world, therefore, needs very careful re”examination both in its specific relation to Zambia and in its general relation to the rest of Africa and the world. For Zambia, first, as I have just mentioned, the r6gim::‘s doctrine of separatism is the very opposite of Zambia’s and, indeed, of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 22. To maintain the special privileges which the white community enjoys in Rhodesia the rbgimc has to perpetuate a class distinction, with colour as the only distinguishing mark. Like South Africa, it has systematically to reduce the freedom of the majority of its black members and bring them to the state of serfs and helots in order to maintain the special cheap labour which makes its agricultural and mining output cheaper and competitive on a world market. It will do this by persuasion through cheap psychological processes playing up the fears of those Africans who are willing to question the regime’s practices but dare not. It will, as it has done all along, tyrannize them using all the familiar tactics I-Iitler used in the 1939-1945 War, the Africans’ only crime being their readily acknowl- 23. Like South Africa, the r&ginie hns tilken every tldministrative step and cvcn conimittcd acts of violence under the law--yes, and even illegal acts--to ensure that the African is permnnently and effectively excluded from the basic fruits of a civilised living. And yet lillodesiil spe:lks out in the 1lam2 of Christianity mC1 justice, as if it ml not lhose whom Rhodesia oppressed were the enduring vie t ims of the pernicious system it 113s Crcnted. Rhodesia did not find its acquired power and apparently impregnable position by accident. Nay, ns if by special design, ISritain laid tdl the foundntion for the present strength of the r6ginie which, through its oscillating polioies arid irresponsible rejection ot the use of force at ;I critical stnge in history, it has iti effect continued to protect, 24. To a Rhodesia cast in this mould WC in Z;tIllbia pose cl Clear threat. Just nbout my exctm will do, and the United Nations, and in particular Britain, which mcmtizcs and tcmporizcs with such duplicity, will soon find that ttic blood-bath which they say they have been seeking tu prevent will finally overtake us all. 2.5. Let me elaborate a little. Britilill llns Sll filr said tIV0 things about the use OF force: it has soid it will not USC force to bring about 8 political scttlemcnt; it h3s nlscl Silid it will consider the us6 of force only in the cvcnt of ;1 breakdown of law and order. This particular sl:~tcmcnt must be analysed, since unless the Council reuiizcs how Britain has hen 1enCli11g the African ltlilsses in Rhodesia down the path to perdition, the Council runs the risk of believing its professed but realty hollow sincerity, md will unwittingly bear wilnoss to a sure SCll-OUt~-~il sell-out moreover, which would hi.9 equal to ttliit of South Africa in 1910 but which will not be countennnccct in this day and ilge by the Africans in Rll~XlCSiil 31lCl which, thcreforc, 1ul1st lead d~9wrl LEN path to wilr. TIN signs of this iIre i~tre;~dy numerous on the frontiers. More Africans Hrc dying in skirmishes with the racist troops, and the Rhodesinns and their South African supporters are swooping clown 011 our Zambia both by uir rind by l:md. 26. The point is this: After iI ctluntry has dcclnrcct itself independent; nftcr it , has tyrannizecl eve everybody iind muzzlctt the press; after it has browbeater> the courts into giving it &* f&to recognlrion; after it he.5 gone ml from there to effect hangings in dCfiilIlCC uf ttlc highest ConStitlb tional safeguard, which, in this cuse was the Q~ICCII’S reprieve.-in Queen, nlorcovcr, to whom the rdginie conveniently held allegiance; after foreign troops hiIvC+! entered a territory and the responsible metropolitan Power has spent its last vest&c of legal ndvicc to prove its own ilnpotcncc---after all this, if nut even before, is it not (imc that it was rccognized that law and order have broken Down in that CCltlIlt~“? IS Britain waiting until ttlc thr(9iltS of Europeans have actually been slit, and does it intend (0 I~KW in then only in order to help the Europeans fight back the enraged black insurgents? Just what can ]jritain mean’? In our minds, the voluntary, quixotic exploits of 30. This is the behaviour of people who call themselves civilized, people who claim to be the defenders of Western democracy and civilization. In the name bfdemocracy and Western civilization they discriminate against black human beings, oppress them and treat them as if they were slaves and quite without feelings. What is there to be learned from a Western democracy so practised? It denies even the ordinary, basic freedoms of life: freedom of movement, freedom of speech, freedom of action and all other kinds of freedom which are the standard attributes of what we know as a civiIized society. 31. As I speak now, all the black nationalist leaders and hundreds of their brothers are under detention in concentration camps in Gonakuzingwa and Whawha. No one is allowed to see them, not even their wives. The moving story reported in The Times of Zambia on 13 March will illustrate this. It is said that Mrs. Joshua Nkomo last saw her husband in October 1966. Since then the rebels have constantly refused to allow her to see him, and have refused to answer her letters on this subject, Indeed, we are not even sure whether Nkomo and Sithole are still alive. 32. The kind of freedom which 220,000 white racists allow to the 4 million black people cannot endure for long. The Africans will not take it lying down, and indeed they have begun to rise in small but significant numbers. The rest of Africa looks on and wonders how long it will be before it too is dragged into the quagmire of a racial war. 33. We in Zambia feel particularly sensitive because of our proximity to the boundary. That is why we have been outspoken critics of the blundering policies of the British Government over the last two years and four months. Nor can Britain escape responsibility, It will be recalled that by an Act of Parliament passed by the House of Commons in November 1965, the British Government affirmed its authority and responsibility concerning Southern Rhodesia. Further, the British Government does not deny that it is its responsibility to topple the rebel rCgime in Rhodesia; it has promised not to grant independence to the minority rCgime without majority rule. This policy, adopted with the accord of the Commonwealth nations only a year ago, was stated very clearly, although we now fear that, with typical subtlety, it is conditioned by all kinds of ifs and buts. Yet the British Government insists that it will not use force against Rhodesia, nor will it impose any economic sanctions which will bring it into direct confrontation with South Africa. The British say now that they intend to extend and strengthen the application of sanctions. One is left with the unanswered question of how they intend to do so if they deliberately refuse to run the risk which any such PoficY of sanctions necessarily entails. Is Britain now going to turn round and say that it cannot use force in Rhodesia because it would not wish to be confronted by South African troops in that Territory? If South Africa will not mind its on the possibility of further contacts by proceeding with the illegal hangings of three men and then two more.” The Prime Minister added that the executions took place while the British Government was considering new ideas with regard to settlement which had been brought back from Rhodesia by former British Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas Home; this in spite of Britain’s own earlier declaration that it would not deal with a treasonable regime and of the clear recommendations of the General Assembly to the British Government not to enter into any negotiations with the representatives of the rebel r&me. The United Kingdom made repeated attempts during the past year to arrive at some understanding with the rebels, culminating, of course, in the ridiculous Tiger constitution’ which proved-very conveniently, I must say-to be the paper tiger that it was. 35. Speaking of the possible reaction of the Security Council, Mr. Wilson is reported to have said that the passionate feelings which the executions had aroused internationally, and consequently at the United Nations, had created a new situation, and he thought that “some desperate and perhaps some unrealistic proposals” might come out of a meeting of the Security Council to be called soon at the demand of the African nations. He is further reported to have said: “Perhaps a little less forceful talk and a little more practical action might get the right answer.” What practical action can he expect if he himself started off by throwing away the golden opportunities which existed just before and shortly after the unilateral declaration of independence? For our part, we in Zambia have not merely talked; we have acted-and to our great cost, as Britain well knows. 36. My delegation is not surprised that the British Government has reacted in this manner to the barbarous and cold-blooded assassination of these black nationalists. British policy on the Rhodesian situation has been and remains evasive and protective of the interests of the British settlers. The interests of the 4 million black people of Zimbabwe are apparently negotiable, whereas those of the white settlers are not; hence the contacts which the British Government renewed with the treasonable Smith while it was not prepared to consult the aggrieved people of Zimbabwe, who are after all the innocent party in this situation, The Tiger Constitution was, in their view, a spectacular example of British duplicity aimed at selling out black interests to the white settlers. 37. Let me say, even at the risk of repetition, that my delegation is not impressed by the pious words uttered by the British representative in this Council when he says that 1 For the statement and document of the meeting between Prime Minister &rold Wilson and Mr. Ian Smith on board HMS Tiger, setting out proposals for an independence constitution; see: Rhodesia-proposals for LI Settlement, 1966 (London, Her MaJesty’s Stationery Office, 1966), Cmnd. 3159. 38. We believe and are convinced that the British Government is perfectly capable of settling the Rhodesian situation with such help as it might request, but mainly the use of force. We cannot address our condemnation of the acts of murder perpetrated by the rebels in Rhodesia to the rebel regime because, in terms of Britain’s own Act, it is Britain which is the sovereign Power in Rhodesia. To us, the British Government is the legal administering Power in Rhodesia, and all acts of violence perpetrated by the rebels are, therefore, carried out in the name of the British Government. 39. My delegation is convinced that British policy on Rhodesia, dubious and vacillating as it may appear, may not be altogether free from guile, We see it rather as the work of an intelligent actor trying to mislead the world. The alternative is equally difficult to accept; and that is that all the reputed intelligence of this great Power has been outweighed by Smith. Rather than say that the lion has lost his strength and cannot roar any more, the probable truth is that the British Government follows a well-charted course, makes well-planned manoeuvres and cleverly manipulates the racial situation, favouring kith and kin. In a way, the British Government has decided who should win this struggle in the end. Indeed, some of its national newspapers-notably The Daily Telegraph-have openly cheered Smith and jeered at the Africans as terrorists. 40. The Security Council should not close its eyes to the fact that a racial war has begun in southern Africa. The Rhodesian and South African freedom fighters who have joined forces to fight against the racist and illegal regime in South Africa have described it as an open war, and the struggle is to be regarded as such. The people of Zimbabwe are sacrificing their young men in the fight for freedom. 41. If the reports we receive are to be relied upon, more than 100 freedom fighters have lost their lives in the Zambezi Valley since the war started in August. Rhodesian and South African forces stand glowering at Zambia from across the Zambezi and accuse us openly of aiding the freedom fighters. After all, it was Vorster who recently threatened that his Government would hit so hard that Zambia would not forget it. Clearly, the Council must address itself to this problem and examine what measures can be taken to forestall any breach of peace and international security in that part of the world, 42. The fact that we share a common border with Rhodesia, South West Africa, Mozambique and Angola, where black people are still struggling to emancipate themselves, is a matter of geographical accident and of great concern to us. I wish to assure the Council that my country is not responsible for the instability and struggle which exists between our borders. I wish to bring to the attention of the Council the serious and grave threat the Rhodesian situation poses to my country. I should like to confirm the 43. May I now turn to the question of economic sanctions imposed by the Council on 16 December 1966 [res&&~n 232 (1966)J at the request of the British Government. As we all know, those sanctions have now been in effect for nearly one and a half years. But, as we predicted, they have failed. 44. Their effect on Rhodesia has been very little, if any, but they have imposed a serious hardship on my country instead. Alfred Friendly Jr., the special f%w York Times correspondent in Rhodesia, writing on 22 March 1968, summed up the Rhodesian situation in the following terms: “Rhodesia is a going concern. It has won its rebellion against Britain, and in the most vital economic sectors it has beaten the effort to impose sanctions on its imports and exports. “Since 11 November 1965 when it declared its independence of Britain, Rhodesia has lost as much as two thirds of its volume of $126 million tobacco exports, but it has managed to evade restrictions on oil imports and is believed to have more than a year’s supply in storage.” On the contrary, Zambia’s oil supplies are hand-to-mouth in nature. Development projects are at a stand-still due to serious shortages of oil in Zambia. Rationing, on the order of five gallons of petrol per month, is still in operation in Zambia. 45. Mr. Friendly goes on to say: “So far the challenge has involved little conspicuous sacrifice by the 250,000 Whites who live a country-club existence among some 4.3 million Blacks ia Rhodesia , . . .” 46. I do not wish to bore the Council with figures and facts to show how and why the selective mandatory sanctions which my delegation never believed would work but which we supported as a matter of principle have failed. 47. We all know that Britain, which maintains a naval blockade off the Mozambique port of Beira with its pipeline to Rhodesia, explains away the flow of oil to Rhodesia through Lourenco Marques on the grounds that it serves the Portuguese colony as well as a few other neighbouring States. We cannot therefore understand the logic of further sanctions unless those sanctions are backed by the use of force to make them work effectively on Rhodesia before they can ruin Zambia. 48. The past record of sanctions has shown up the difficulty of taking only half-hearted measures. Portugal has kept open the rail connexions and seaports, particularly Beira, Mozambique, Rhodesia’s principal export and import channel. One report stated that Mozambique had supplied Rhodesia with enough oil to ensure a stockpile against two years of sanctions. Portugal had also reportedly been exporting Southern Rhodesia’s embargoed goods, primarily tobacco and sugar. Furthermore, oil continues to be 49, My delegation condemns the activities of the Government of Portugal and the South African authorities for sustaining the Rhodesian rebels and aiding them to beat the sanctions. As Members of the United Nations, clearly they should be under the obligation not to frustrate the effort which is being made with the sanctions caIled for by that body. Two colonial States cannot be permitted to disrupt the collaborative efforts of the international community. We raise our voices, furthermore, in condemnation of the acts of the trading partners of those two States which give them encouragement to continue with their iniquitous policies. 50. Allow me, in conclusion, to sum up the position of my Government and that of the Organization of African Unity: first, we remain convinced that the most effective way of bringing the rebels to their knees is the use of force, We call upon the British Government to realize that this is the only realistic measure. We particularly call upon it to face up to its responsibilities. Secondly, we hold the view that the British Government is fully responsible for the recent assassinations of African nationalists in Southern Rhodesia. We condemn British failure to take decisive measures to prevent the assassinations and to topple the illegal rbgime. Thirdly, we declare the existing selective mandatory economic sanctions to be both a farce and a fiasco and totally incapable of ever inflicting harm on the rebel rhgime in Salisbury, and we condemn the actions of the South African authorities who, in support of their policy of apartheid, have aided and abetted the rebels in their efforts to beat the sanctions. Fourthly, my Government wishes to state to the United Kingdom Government that the responsibility for settling the Rhodesian situation is and remains the responsibility of the British Government, which is the administering Power. Fifthly, we are convinced that the situation in Rhodesia has reached a tragic state of chaos and that law and order does not exist there, and consequently we request the British to respect their policy as pronounced by Mr. Wilson, when he said on 11 November 1965: “Our troops are asked to preserve law and order and to avert a tragic action, subversion, murder and so on.” We submit that that stage has now been reached and that, finally, British troops are required to proceed to the Territory to preserve law and order, 5 1 d Mr. President, once again may I thank you very much indeed for giving me this opportunity to express the views of my country before this very important Council.

We meet today, at the request of the African countries, to consider the question of Southern Rhodesia in view of the recent events in that country. The conscience of the whole world has already expressed its total repudiation of the illegal execution of five African nationalists by the Government of 53. My Government has fully supported the actions taken by the United Nations in coping with the serious situation in Southern Rhodesia. We have fully applied the economic sanctions recommended by Security Council resolution 232 (1966). In February 1968, the Brazilian Government, by executive decree, ordered all national authorities to implement the selective embargo decided upon by the Council. As far as the Brazilian Government is concerned, this policy has been and will continue to be strictly enforced. During the twenty-second session of the General Assembly, the Brazilian delegation voted for resolution 2262 (XXII), which was approved by 92 votes, 54. No doubts seem to exist around this table as to the substance of the problem before us. We all agree on the need for taking positive action to stop Southern Rhodesia from continuing along the perilous path it has chosen. The problem, is, however, one of method, of what can best be done to attain this purpose. My delegation feels that the Security Council should strongly censure the de facto regime in Southern Rhodesia for the illegal execution of the five African nationalists and that it should also warn Salisbury against the repetition of such crimes. 55. My delegation believes, however, that this is not enough and that the Council should move forward, proceeding to a thorough examination of the whole situation in Southern Rhodesia in the light of the Security Council decision of 16 December 1966 and its aftermath. The discussion of the real effectiveness of the selective sanctions applied to Southern Rhodesia has produced more heat than light. This is no time to reopen the issue, but the fact is that no precise and irrefutable conclusion has been reached on it. One fact stands out clearly, however: although Southern Rhodesia’s economic life seems to have been hurt, the Salisbury regime has somehow managed to survive and to ignore its condemnation by the international community. 56. Thus it seems to us that the course of wisdom lies in this Council’s tightening to the breaking point the economic pressure on Southern Rhodesia. This can be effectively done through a broadening of the trade embargo, which should finally convince the white minority in Rhodesia that the time has come to reassess past and present policies, to accept the reality of change and to withdraw its support of the Smith rigime, putting an end to the rebellion. In applying selective sanctions to Rhodesia, the Council has not even partially utilized the entire range of economic measures which it can take under the Charter of the United Nations; and, as we all know, economic sanctions are only one of the many kinds of sanctions,

The Government and people of Pakistan have expressed their horror at the action of the usurper rdgime of Ian Smith in putting t0 dcattl five freedom fighters of Zimbabwe, This brutal crime, perpetrated in defiance of the authority and majesty of the Queen, has aggravated ,the threat to international peace and security in southern Africa. 59. In the view of my delegation the primary responsibility for protecting the human rights of the people of Zimbabwe pending the transfer of power to them must remain that of the United Kingdom as the administering Power. Everything that is humanly possible must be done to ensure that no more killings of freedom fighters take place. Operation paragraph 4 of Security Council resolution 217 (1965) of 20 November 196.5 called upon the administering Power to quell the rebellion of the racist minority regime. Unfortunately, the performance of the administering Power has fallen short of our expectations. GO. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom gave the assurance that his Government would not rule out the use of force in the event of a breakdown of law and order. One is constrained to ask: is not the contemptuous defiance of the authority and prerogative of the Crown and the recourse to a reign of terror indicative of a collapse of law and order? My Government does not have the slightest doubt that the acts of murder had a purely racial motivation and were designed to intimidate the Zimbabwe freedom fighters. They furnish a shocking reminder to us all of the inadequacy of the action taken so far by the international community. Indeed this inadequacy has cmboldened the Smith rdgime to extend the inhuman system of upurtlzeid to Southern Rhodesia; the representatives of Algeria and Ethiopia have already drawn our attention to this. 01. It is inevitable that this campaign of repression should proportionately increase resistance on lhc part of patriots. A former Premier of Southern Rhodesia, Mr:Garfield Todd, stated recently that “events are pushing Africans to seek opportunity through violence”‘. 62. The gravity of the situation in the southern part of Africa cannot be met by half measures taken haltingly. If I do not now intend to speak at length, it is because my task has been lightened by the lucid and comprehensive analyses of the situation made by the representatives of Algeria and Ethiopia and other colleagues, notably by the Foreign Minister of Zambia a few moments ago, 63. The Security Council has to address itself to one concrete question: why has the grave situation in Southern Rhodesia continued and worsened despite the adoption of resolution 232 (1966) of 16 December 19&j? In other 68. I venture to submit with all respect that the Security Council, after adopting resolution 232 (1966) under Chapter VII of the Charter, has so far not exercised its own supervision over the implementation of that resolution. We are impelled to call for the continuing direction and control of the Security Council over the implementation measures because the application of comprehensive mandatory sanctions would be a historic step for the United Nations to take. We must not underrate the magnitude, the difficulty and the complexity of the task. If we are to prevent a repetition of past failures in the history of sanctions, it is imperative to reinforce the Secretary-General’s supervision of implementation of the resolution with that of the Council itself. 69. In conclusion I would emphasize, on behalf of my Government, that the situation in Rhodesia has become more grave since it was first brought before the Council, What disturbs the world community and should evoke the Security Council’s response is not only rebellion and the collapse of the rule of law in a certain Territory, the utter denial of human rights or e,ven the barbarities committed there. Those are no doubt the explosive elements in the situation. But there is also the growing menace of the alliance of racism and colonialism in southern Africa. That sinister alliance has launched an offensive against the forces working towards a just and stable order in Africa. The Security Council cannot now retreat or parley. It has no choice but to go forward and fight the offensive tc a victorious end. That is the message that should go from the Council to Salisbury,

I wish to begin by saying that the Chinese Government and people, in common with all mankind, have been profoundly shocked by the executions recently carried out in Southern Rhodesia in defiance of world opinion. 71. It is now more than two years since the Security Council came to the conclusion that the Smith r6gime should be brought to an end as speedily as possible, But the measures that have been brought to bear on the situation have been either too limited in scope or too restricted in their application. On 12 November 1965 Mr. Michael Stewart, then British Foreign Secretary, indicated to this Council that the economic and financial measures put into force by the British Government, with the support of the United Nations, would be sufficient to “compel those who have committed this illegal act to realize that they have thereby inflicted grave damage on the trade, economy and currency of their country” (1257th meeting, para. 331. The result was the adoption of resolution 217 (1965), 73. The African delegations rightly questioned the efficacy of the selective mandatory sanctions. The situation in Southern Rhodesia, they argued, involved more than human rights and fundamental freedoms; it constituted a threat to international peace and security, They therefore pressed for the use of force. On this point I said in my statement before the Council on 16 December 1966: $‘I can appreciate the reluctance on the part of the United Kingdom Government to employ military action, but I am not sure whether it is wise or necessary that the legitimate use of force should be ruled out of consideration entirely. The important thing is that the situation should be liquidated as swiftly as possible. Economic sanctions, if they are not effectively applied, will only prolong the agony and cause increasing hardship to the millions of indigenous inhabitants whose welfare we all seek to protect.” (1339th meeting, para. 40.1 At that time I also pointed out, however, that the use of force, if it were necessary, had to be left to the discretion of the administering Power. 74. That remains the position of my delegation. Inasmuch as the unilateral declaration of independence is an ,act of rebellion against the constitutional authority, the British Government has the legitimate right to suppress it with all the means at its disposal, including military action. Indeed, the British Government did not hesitate in’Apri1 1966 to ask for authorization to use force to prevent the shipment of oil to Rhodesia via Beira. My delegation well knows that force should not be lightly used. But force, the legitimate use of force, in the prevailing circumstances should not be precluded as a last resort when all possibilities of a peaceful settlement are exhausted. It is significant that this line of reasoning has lately found expression in a responsible section of public opinion in the United Kingdom itself. 75. In the last analysis, of course, the main burden of any enforcement action must necessarily fall on the United Kingdom. That being so, my delegation believes that it is the United Kingdom that must decide whether force can be effectively used. The responsibility of the United Nations is not so much to suppress a rebellion as to protect the interests of the 4 million inhabitants of Southern Rhodesia. 76. So far as the sanctions authorized by the Security Council in resolution 232 (1966) are concerned, my Gov- 77. It is all too clear, therefore, that there can be no effective economic sanctions without the co-operation of all Member States of the United Nations. Unless all Member States of the United Nations are prepared to fulfil their obligations under the Charter, the sanctions cannot be effective. 78. It has been suggested in the course of the present debate that sanctions authorized by the Council should be broadened into a total trade embargo against Rhodesia. My delegation is in favour of such comprehensive mandatory economic sanctions. That, too, requires the full co-operation of all Member States. As far as my delegation is concerned, we are prepared to support any appropriate moves the Council may take to bring to an end the illegal Smith regime.

Once again the Security Council is meeting to consider serious events that have taken place in the southern part of Africa. On this occasion we are considering the situation in Southern Rhodesia, where an illegal, minority and racist regime will go to any lengths in its attempt to retain the power it exercises over a people ruthlessly subjugated, exploited and repressed. Once again the Council is confronted with the results of the inhuman and universally condemned policy of apartheid. 80. The illegal Salisbury regime has imposed the maximum penalty on a large number of Zimbabwe nationals for the crime of having loved their homeland. Five of them have already been executed, after being deprived of their most elementary rights, The same fate hangs over many others. 81. The monstrosity of the crime committed by the racist regime in Southern Rhodesia has shocked the conscience of the world and caused an uproar of indignation and protest. The Government I represent has supported and scrupulously implemented the decisions of the United Nations, and it now adds its voice to that protest and pays a tribute to the martyrs sacrificed at Salisbury, At this tragic time for the tortured, heroic Zimbabwe people, it is our individual and collective duty to condemn the inhuman acts committed by the Smith regime, to safeguard the lives and rights of the prisoners in the condemned cell and, above all, to do all in our power to put an end to the rebellion on which the illegal regime is based and to restore power to those to whom it truly belongs, namely, the Zimbabwe

I trust that Council members will now allow me, as representative of SENEGAL, to state my delegation’s views on the matter before us. 84, “Everything has been said and we are too late, for men have lived and have thought for 7,000 years. We can only imitate the Ancients or glean something from the cleverest of the Moderns.” La Bruyere said that back in the 17th century, and that is the thought which comes to my mind as we embark upon the question of Southern Rhodesia. 85. In fact, since 11 November 1965, when the white minority in Southern Rhodesia unilaterally proclaimed the country’s independence in defiance of world opinion and of the international sovereignty of the United Kingdom, the Security Council has on several occasions turned its attention to this serious problem. 86. Senegal, which together with Algeria and Zambia has been given a special mandate to follow this matter in the General Assembly as well as in the Security Council, has from the very beginning called for drastic action to put an end to Mr. Ian Smith’s illegal regime and thus rescue the Zimbabwe people from being slaves in their own country. We have said repeatedly that this illegal regime could be eliminated only by means of total and compulsory sanetions, or even, if necessary, by the use of force. But we believe that the great initial error committed in this affair was the statement by Mr. Wilson, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, who on 29 October 1965 told the African leaders at Salisbury that if Mr. Ian Smith’s Government made a unilateral declaration of independence the United Kingdom would not intervene militarily. 87, Did this not in fact amount to giving Mr. Ian Smith’s Government a clear field by assuring it of impunity in advance? It was, moreover, a very surprising action, since the United Kingdom was one of the first Powers to decolonize and to grant freedom and national independence to millions and millions in Africa and Asia. Yet in the course of this emancipation, the United Kingdom seems suddenly to hesitate, to stop and even to draw back, with the psychological vacillations to which the heroes of Shakespearean drama are prone. 88. We are accustomed to read on the British coat-ofarms: “Dieu et mon droit”, In this Rhodesian affair, 90. We are forced to admit that selective sanctions have failed, They have failed chiefly because of the trade which, by-passing them, has infiltrated through South Africa and Mozambique. This has only confirmed Senegal’s fears, for we said from the very first that economic sanctions are always a delusion. Contemporary history shows that States to which they are applied always succeed in thwarting and evading them. Witness the failure of all the sanctions ever carried out, from Napoleon I’s continental blockade against Great Britain to the sanctions which have been applied against Ian Smith’s illegal Government, with special mention of the sanctions decreed by the League of Nations against Mussolini’s Italy when he invaded Ethiopia. 91. Nevertheless, in view of the tragic worsening of the situation in Southern Rhodesia following upon the hanging of the freedom fighters, the United Kingdom must come to recognize the ineffectiveness of selective sanctions and must assume its full responsibilities by applying more vigorous economic sanctions and if necCssary resorting to the use of force. 92, As regards the use of force, here is the opinion of the leader of the British Liberal Party, who made the following statement during the last weekend: “Great Britain should have sent troops to Rhodesia within three hours of the unilateral declaration of independence and Great Britain should have bombed the railway communications between Rhodesia and Mozambique when the economic sanctions on petroleum were violated.” That is what the leader of the Liberal Party, Mr. Jeremy Thorpe, said in Colchester last week. He added “It is not too late to consider the use of force to put an end to the regime of Ian Smith.” 93. The white minority in Rhodesia has tried to formulate an ideology to justify its misdeeds in southern Africa, South of the Zambesi. 94. Mr. Ian Smith, Pretoria and Portugal are now the champions of the values of Western civilization and Western culture. But these three sinister crusaders have a strange way of defending the values of Western culture, for they do it by hanging, torturing and massacring the Africans. In this way they are’ not merely mutilating but betraying the real and genuine values of Western culture. It is surely to them that one of the greatest of contemporary Indian poets, Rabindranath Tagore, was speaking when he cried: “Civilization, civilization, pride of the Europeans, YOU are not a 96, Speaking as PRESIDENT, I now call on the representative of the United Kingdom to speak in the exercise of his right of reply. 97. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): I do not propose now to comment on a series of remarkable and thoughtful speeches which have been made this afternoon, nor, indeed, even to comment on the moving address to which we have just listened from our poet President. But I feel that, in respect to the Foreign Minister of Zambia, I should say a word in reply to him. 98. I am indeed sorry that he should speak so bitterly, though I do not believe that he has come all the way from Africa, all the way from Lusaka, only to make sweeping imputations of low motive and bad faith. I fully understand the reasons for the bitterness of his words, Some of them were wounding and insulting. But I well know the strains and the sacrifices which Zambia has suffered, and I may be permitted to say perhaps that I admire the stand which his country has made in the face of those strains and sacrifices, and I well appreciate the depth of feeling of anger and disgust caused, by the brutal hangings. I share those feelings, and the last thing that I want to do is to quarrel with the Foreign Minister of Zambia. 99. Me rightly said that there is really only one question before us, and that is the question: What practical action can now be taken, what practical and effective action? 100. The representative of Hungary said that British policy had no constructive elements. That is not so and we shall show that that is not so. One of the most unsatisfactory customs of the Council is to quote one’s own speeches, but I ask permission to refer to what I said when I spoke a few days ago, because the Foreign Minister of Zambia was not then present, I said then: “My earnest recommendation to the Council is that we should at once undertake a full and careful review of past action and future possibilities, and I accordingly place myself at the disposal of the Council for urgent consultation. I sincerely trust that that offer will be accepted in the spirit of full co-operation in which it is made. “I do not for a moment forget or deny the practical difficulties we must honestly face and the real limitations on what can in fact be done. We have not failed to state them. But I greatly hope that, however strong the feelings of members of the Council, and before they make up their minds, there will be a readiness to consult on the basis of the hard facts and the practical possibilities. I I said that when I spoke before, and I repeat it to the Foreign Minister. 101. 1 made the offer of consultations. It has been taken up and we have been pursuing those consultations in a spirit of conlplete frankness and in an endeavour to find coI11111o11 ground for our advance. 1 made the offer to members of this Council and, as the Foreign Minister of Zambia wiil know, I made the smile offer to him. Wllerl he cz.m~~ to New York I put myself at his disposal for a discussion with him, which I undertake will be a full and frank discussion, so that he can understand the practical difficulties which I have to explain to him, and I can better understand the course which he believes that WC should follow. I a111 convinced that nothing but good can come from sucl~ consultations. Maybe disagreements, maybe strong feehgs will remain, but I am sure that it is necessary--and I have 110 doubt that he will agree=that WC must in the present situation sit down together to see what can be done. 102. I cannot believe fht in so doing members of the Council and the Minister of Zambia, so closely conccmed, will be wasting our time. Because in a]1 the stntenlcnts I have read and seen in recent weeks on the appallingly difficult problem which facts US, I have s~erl imlongst the African and Asian statements that-,-.whatevcr else is asked for--there is a demand that we sh0~1d exanlinc what more can be done to make sanctions more fully effective. WC arc ready and anxious to carry out that survey, and to do it not alone, but in full and, I hope, frienclly co~~sultntion, 103. I do not wish to misrcprcscnt anyone. I know that the decision taken by the Organization of African IJnity a month ago contained murly rcquiremcnts and included a number of major dcmnnds. But you will permit me, perhaps, to read the final demand that was made by the Organization of African Unity at the mceting3 which took place just over a month ago in Addis Ababa. The final requirement reads as follows: “lit@ll.~tS the African Croup at the United Nations with the task of working tirelessly for the cffcctive hplementation of Security Council resolution 232 ( 1966) and to work for an extensian of the present alectivc mandatory sanctions, so that they become comprchcnsivc 3 ‘I’cnth Ordinary Session of the Cbuncil of Ministers of t[Ic Organizalion of African Unity, 20-24 February 19(jg. The Council of Ministers, meeting in its Tenth Ordinary Session at Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from 20 to 24 February 1968, Noting with approval the report of the Administrative Secretary- General, and the report of the Committee of Five on Rhodesia as well as the report of the Foreign Ministers of Algeria, Senegal and Zambia, RecaNi/tg its resolutions CM/lies.75 (VI) of 6 March 1966, CMjRes.78 (VII) of 4 November 1966, CM/Res.96 (VIII) of 4 March 1967 and CM/Res.108 (IX) of 10 September 1967 concerning Rhodesia, and also resolution 232 (1966) of 16 December 1966 of the Security Council of the United Nations imposing selective mandatory sanctions against Rhodesia, and General Assembly resolution 2262 (XXII) of 8 November 1967, Colluinced that the selective mandatory sanctions as approved by the United Nations have completely failed to bring down the illegal racist minority regime in Rhodesia, S’frongly convinced that the’situation in Rhodesia represents a threat to international peace and security, 1. Condemns as a crime against humanity the atrocities perpetrated by the illegal racist minority regime in Rhodesia against the African people fighting for their freedom; 2. Condemns the economic, financial and other interests which impede the progress of the African people towards independence; 3. Condemns unreservedly the Government of the United Kingdom for its continued failure in assuming effectively its moral and political responsibilities to the people of Zimbabwe and by allowing the illegal racist minority regime of Ian Smith to consolidate its position in defiance of African and world opinion; 4. Strongly condemns all those countries, and in particular Great Britain which, in violation of Security Council resolution 232 (1966) of 16 December 1966 imposing selective mandatory sanctions on Rhodesia, continue to maintain direct and indirect commercial and trade links with the illegal regime; 5. Reiterates its conviction that the primary responsibility for toppling the illegal racist minority regime in Salisbury rests squarely with the United Kingdom and remains convinced more than ever that the only way to bring down the illegal r6gime is by the use of force; 6. Strongly reaffirms the right of the people of Zimbabwe to freedom and independence; 7. Again calls upon the liberation movements of Zimbabwe to close their ranks and form a common front in their struggle against the common enemy for the speedy and effective liberation of their country; 8. Entrusts the African Group at the United Nations with the task of working tirelessly for the effective implementation of Security Council resolution 232 (1966) and to work for an extension of the present selective mandatory sanctions, so that they become comprehensive and mandatory as envisaged under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations in view of the deterioration of the grave situation in Rhodesia; 9. Decides to retain the question of Rhodesia on its agenda. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Notions publicotions.moy be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Notions, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sent en vente dans ler libroiries et les ogencer dkpositaires du monde entier. Informer-vous auprk de votre libroirie DU adrerrez-vous 6: Nations Unies, Section der venter, New York ou Genkve. KAK IlOnY~MTb MSAAHMfl OPTAHM3A~MM 06bEAMHEHHbIX HAuMfi ~h~Hlli1~ Opl%ilIi3N~nil 06’I~t’AiiilCiiiii,iX Ik@i hfOiIiii0 ICYII~ITL n I~iliiiliIiLiX MEirZli1li~X II BI’CIIT~‘TiI~X 110 DPCX ptli”iOlIaX Jrlipa. IhnOAaTC CIIpaIIiiif 06 ii3J(tliliiliX n ilaiIiClr IiiiiiiiiIiOX Ytlra3IIiiC ii.lii LliillIilTC II0 Zl@CCj’: Opmiinoaqwr Ofi~e~iii~e~iii~i~ Ifaqrdi, Cewi~ uo IIpOAaiiiC il3&aIlilfi, ~~~biO-~O~lii ii.lil xhIlCB& COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS tar publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estdn en vento en libreriar y cosos distribuidoras en todor porter del mundo. Consulte q su librero o dirijare a: Nocioner Unidos, Secci6n de Ventar, Nuevo York o Ginebro. Litho in U.N. Price: $U.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies) 35418-March 1971-2,100