S/PV.1476 Security Council

The Council will now continue its discussion of the item before it, 5. Before giving the floor to the first speaker on my list, I would announce that the Permanent Representative of Cyprus has sent me a note informing me that he wishes to be a co-sponsor of the letter, in document S/9237, from the fifty-nine Afro-Asian countries requesting an urgent meeting of the Security Council.

The French delegation fully understands the emotion which the latest events in Rhodesia have aroused in the world and especially in the countries whose delegations have taken the initiative of calling for a meeting of the Council. Adoption of the agenda

Before submitting to the Council the agenda for this afternoon’s meeting, I wish to apologize to all members for the long delay in starting it. As you know, this has been caused by the efforts made to reach agreement. I regret to say that, so far, these efforts have been’unsuccessful. 7. France has never recognized the illegal Salisbury regime. Consequently, it cannot condone any submission by a rebel organization to referendum of a draft constitution whose unjustifiable nature is made all the more obvious by the fact that it sanctifies the maintenance of arbitrary and discriminatory domination of a majority by a minority. It is by reason of the principle of equality so dear to France that it opposes the action in question. France has rigorously applied the economic sanctions pronounced against Rhodesia, To be sure, those sanctions, limited at first but general later, are of comparatively recent origin and some may argue that they have yet to produce their full effect. On the other hand, it must be recognized that the difficulties they have brought to the economy of the rebel rdgime scarcely seem to have shaken it and in any event it is 2. Document S/Agenda/1476, which has been circulated to the Council members, contains the provisional agenda of this meeting. 3. If there are no objections, I will consider the agenda adopted. The agenda was adopted. 9. Despite these considerations, France did not wish to dissociate itself from the measures taken by the Council against Rhodesia and, on 29 May 1968, participated in the vote on resolution 253 (1968). It thereby wished to demonstrate its awareness of the extent of the emotion being aroused, particularly in Africa, by the prolongation of the Rhodesian crisis, 10. That is why, without departing from the position of principle it has always taken on the question of United Nations competence, France is prepared to join in a unanimous condemnation of the draft constitution drawn up by the illegal Salisbury @me. It is also ready to participate in any appeal recommending States not to recognize in any way the authorities of that r&me. Lastly, it will be prepared to consider any realistic and effective proposal to remedy the present situation.

This morning we heard with much interest the statements made by the Foreign Minister of Zambia, the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of; Algeria and other representatives. Those were very comprehensive statements, very moving statements, and there is hardly anything that I could add to them. I refer particularly to the statement by the Foreign Minister whose country, Zambia, while bearing the major brunt of the sanctions imposed by the Security Council, continues none the less to remain at the forefront of the fight against illegality, racialism and colonialism in Southern Rhodesia. The Foreign Minister has depicted the situation of Southern Rhodesia in its true perspective. My delegation is grateful to him for the clarity, objectivity and eloquence he has brought to bear in his presentation,of the case, 12. The African Member States of the Security Council have, most naturally, taken the lead in the discussion of the present situation in Southern Rhodesia, which has been further aggravated by the impending constitutional referendum proposed for next week by the illegal Smith r&me. We stand firmly with them in this noble endeavour. But let me state here in this Council that, as far as the delegation of Nepal is concerned, we support them not because we regard the question of Southern Rhodesia as an African question, but because we sincerely feel that this question, thanks to the administering Power, has assumed the character of an ugly world problem, increasingly threatening international peace and security with the passage of each day, 14. As a representative from Asia-a continent which has become the most embattled portion of the world since 1945-I would hardly feel comfortable were I to minimize[ the dangers of wars such as those in Viet-Nam and the Middle East; but it appears to me, from a general, long-term view, that the danger posed to posterity and human civilization by this so-called African question is greater in i magnitude than that posed by any other single question with which we live today. For, involved in this question is not a matter of narrow political ideologies, nor one of i geographical frontiers, but a much more fundamentaj matter, one on which the whole edifice of human civiliza. tion is erected and one without which a man is no longer a man. It is, to quote Senator Kennedy, the value of the human being: “God’s gift to life itself ‘. 15. It is a matter of common knowledge that Southern Rhodesia, South Africa and Portugal have formed a triangle of unholy alliance and that the purpose of that alliance is to perpetuate colonialism, racism and discrimination in the whole of southern Africa. The lowest common denomi. nator of the unholy alliance lies in the hatred and fear, the distrust and suspicion felt by one human being towards another. 16. The policies and methods of apartheid, as preached and practised in Southern Rhodesia and its ally South 1 Africa are, in reality, an improvement on those that were so fashionable at one time in Nazi Germany. Those in power , in those countries are feeding themselves on the fee’lings of fear and hatred and the baser animal instincts osf their fellow-beings, They are committing those crimes in the name of civilization and the supremacy of the white race. They call themselves the torchbearers of Western civiliza. j tion and the doctrine of racial superiority. They are generally disowned and their policies deplored; but the fact remains that they receive material and moral suppo;rt from certain Member States of the United Nations. 17. The present discussion in the Council has been actuated primarily by the introduction in Southenn Rho. desia of a new draft constitution which, in the wordls ofits author, Mr. Ian Smith, is designed to “entrench government in the hands of civilized”-meaning white-“people for all time”. Whatever may be the object or nature of the draft constitution, we are of the view, having condemned the unilateral declaration of independence as illegal, that the Smith regime has no authority at all to promulgate nny constitution. 18. Having ursurped power illegally, the racist minority r@me is obviously trying to consolidate its hold. This isa serious matter meriting the urgent attention of the Council. In the face of this challenge, it is essential that the Council pronounce itself on the question with one voice and one mind. 2 , 20. For the situation is worsening day,by day. Sanctions have apparently not been effective, because of the uncooperative attitude of certain States, particularly South Africa and Portugal, which in violation of Article 25 of the Charter, have openly provided cover for southern Rhodesian imports and exports, My delegation would strongly urge immediate adoption of measures envisaged under Article 41, and extension of the sanctions to cover South Africa and Portugal as well. 26. In the draft constitution they have concocted, the racists want four million Africans to be represented in the new “Parliament” by only sixteen members, while the small white minority, constituting onIy five per cent of the population, would have fifty seats. 21. Our support for these actions by the Security Council does not, however, preclude us from continuing to hold to the firm and consistent view that it is the primary responsibility of the administering Power to take all necessary measures, including the use of force, to end the rebel regime and to ensure self-determination and independence for the people of Southern Rhodesia, 27. In practical terms, this reflects the effort of the tiny racist exploiting minority to consolidate its power and supremacy. On 7 May of this year, Smith, the ringleader of the Southern Rhodesia racists, declared with cynical frarilcness that the new constitution sounds the death knell for majority rule. Speaking a week later in Sinoia (Southern Rhodesia), he repeated that the new constitution excludes majority rule forever. 22. Speaking of the administering Power, my delegation cannot but regret that its handling of the situation in Southern Rhodesia has been less than candid from the very beginning. It resisted attempts by the United Nations even to discuss the question; and, having thus encouraged the rebel elements to issue the unilateral declaration of independence, the administering Power, instead of dealing with them decisively and at once in a manner to be understood by them, shifted its responsibility onto the shoulders of the United Nations. For the United Nations, Southern Rhodesia is indeed a painful legacy. 28. The plans of the racists are not confined to making the political inequality and serfdom of the indigenous African population of Southern Rhodesia more rigid; they are also aimed at legalizing the economic bondage and shameless plundering of the people of Zimbabwe. Under the terms of the new “constitution”, the European minority, consisting of only five cent of the population, will receive the same amount of land as the all indigenous inhabitants of the territory, who constitute ninety-five per cent of the total population. 23. Even today, after nearly four years of the unilateral declaration of independence, the administering Power has signally failed to take a correct position of principle with regard to Southern Rhodesia. In this connexion, it is interesting to note one of the professed principles of the British position, which is “unimpeded progress towards majority rule”. This means, in effect, that even if the rebellion were to topple and fall, the administering Power would not regard the people of Southern Rhodesia as fit to be entrusted with immediate independence or majority rule. Perhaps they are to be taught further in the art of self-government. We should have expected the administering Power to have at least the strength of character and the determination to put up a strong moral front vis-a-vis the illegal regime. 29. Although now United Kingdom Government officials and public figures in talking about this constitution even say that it is designed to divide Rhodesia permanently on racial lines and that it embodies the permanent dictatorship and censorship of a police State, the very fact that such a racist regime and such a shameful document directed against the people could come into being is a logical consequence of the colonialist policy pursued by the imperialist Powers, and above all by the United Kingdom, in the matter of Southern Rhodesia. Many facts could be cited which clearly show how the United Kingdom has actually promoted step by step the emergence and consolidation of racist minority rule in Southern Rhodesia. In 1961, the United Kingdom authorities endowed the white minority of Southern Rhodesia with a racist, inhuman constitution; when the Federation of Nyasaland and Rhodesia was dissolved, they handed over to this minority aircraft, armoured vehicles and other armament which were than used by the racists to suppress the Zimbabwe people’s national liberation struggle; and then there is the benevolent attitude towards the racist regime shown by the United Kingdom Government at the Commonwealth Conference

The Security Council has met today to consider urgently th.e extremely serious situation which has developed in Southern Rhodesia. The nature of the statements of members of the Council and the fact that such high-ranking representatives of two African countries-the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Algeria and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Zambia-are taking part in this meeting, are a striking indication of the seriousness of the question we are considering today. 30. All of us listened attentively to the statement by Lord Caradon. At the beginning of his speech he condemned the racist regime in Southern Rhodesia, but at the end he appealed for “slow” and “well-considered” progress on the problem of Southern Rhodesia and in this connexion, he repreated his old advice about the cavalry and the sappers. Now, the question naturally arises: who are these sappers and where is their sap leading to? In what direction are they trenching? Everyone knows that sappers’ work includes undermining and camouflage. Apparently Lord Caradon first gave his advice about the cavalry and the sappers at a Security Council meeting more than a year ago. However, as we all know, developments in Southern Rhodesia since then create a distinct impression that, as regards Southern Rhodesia, British sappers are engaged, not in undermining the Smith regime so as to blow it up, but rather in camouflaging its crimes against the people of Zimbabwe. 31. In the letter addressed by representatives of Afro- Asian States to the President of the Security Council, the Missions of those countries-more than fifty of them-justly observe that the sanctions against the racist regime of Southern Rhodesia provided for in Security Council resolution 253 (1968) have not led to the desired results. 32. But who is violating this and other resolutions of the Security Council and General Assembly concerning Southern Rhodesia, and who is continuing to maintain commercial, economic and other relations with Smith’s racist regime, thereby making ineffective the sanctions ordered by the United Nations. 33. Are such violations committed only by the racist regime of South Africa and the colonialist-Fascist regime of Portugal, which are abhorred by the African peoples and are known to be in direct military and political alliance and collusion with Smith’s racist regime? No, not only by them. 34, The effective application of measures against the minority racist regime at Salisbury is also being undermined by other States Members of the United Nations which, under the Charter, are bound to comply with and implement Security Council decisions. Foremost among these countries is the United ,Kingdom, along with the Federal Republic of Germany, the United States of America, and some other States, mainly members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), whose representatives are not averse on occasion to masking behind a smoke-screen of bombastic phrases and legalistic quibbling, the anti-African activities of the imperialist monopolies of their ,countries which maintain close commercial and economic relations 35. The policy of connivance with the Smith regime and the direct aid and comfort being given this racist regime, not only by Portugal and South Africa, but also by other Western countries, encourage the Southern Rhodesia racists to ever new anti-African crimes, such as the sham an’d illegal “referendum” planned by the racists for the adoption of the anti-peoples constitution. 36. In the view of the Soviet delegation, neither this referendum nor the racist “constitution” can be regarded as lawful. The holding of a referendum in order to iadopt a “constitution” is aimed at stabilizing racist rule and consolidating the policy of apartheid in Southern Rhodesia. It might only further complicate the situation in that country and increase the threat to the peace and security of the African peoples. That is why the Soviet delegation strongly urges that the Security Council should decisively reject the so-called “constitution” of the Southern Rhodesia racists and reaffirm that until the Zimbabwe people has exercised its right to self-determination and indepcndence, the situation in that country will remain explosive and constitute a serious threat to universal peace. 37, In his speech, Mr.Yost, the representative of the United States of America, quoted the statement of Smith, the ringleader of the Southern Rhodesia racists, to the effect that his regime was the vehicle and defender of Western civilization in Africa. If a bloody regime of domination of the 95 per cent African population of the country by the 5 per cent white population, a regime of terror and violence towards Africans, is manifesmtion of Western civilization, then God save the peoples of Africa and the world from such a civilization! 38. The dreadful scenes of terror, torture and violence exercised in Southern Rhodesia against the African fighters for the freedom and independence of their homeland which Ambassador Boye, the representative of Senegal, described to the Council so convincingly in his speech today, are a clear illustration of what kind of civilization the racists are installing and defending in Zimbabwe. 39. The Soviet delegation fully shares the views expressed here by the African and Asian representatives that the 40. At the same time, I consider it very important to emphasize that the situation in Southern Rhodesia cannot be divorced from the general international situation. As the head of the delegation of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Comrade L. I. Brezhnev, pointed out recently at the International Conference of Communist and Workers’ Parties held at Moscow: “Imperialism is actively working to slow down the movement towards independence and social progress, to keep its former colonies within the framework of the capitalist system and to preserve them as objects of exploitation, although in new and different forms.” The situation in Southern Rhodesia is a striking manifestation and confirmation of this imperialist policy, a policy whose object is to deny four million Zimbabwe people their independence, to place all kinds of obstacles on their road to freedom, sovereignty and social progress. At this time, when the colonial peoples of southern Africa are waging a heroic and, in most cases, an armed struggle for their liberation, the Soviet people wholly and completely supports this just struggle of the Africans for their national freedom and independence. 45. It is regrettable that during our two meetings today the Security Council did not succeed in putting those intentions into effect and taking such a decision. The methods of those who call upon us to adopt the tactics of sappers in so far as the Rhodesian problem is concerned, had a part in this. 46. The Soviet delegation considers that the Security Council should reaffirm its appeal to all States, contained in Security Council resolution 217 (1965) of 20 November 1965, not to recognize the racist regime of Southern Rhodesia, whatever the guise that regime might assume, and not to entertain any diplomatic or other relations with it. 47. The USSR delegation supports the proposals of a number of Afro-Asian countries concerning the need to take more energetic steps to enable the Zimbabwe people to exercise its right of self-determination in accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. 41. This attitude of the Soviet people and of the Government of the Soviet Union stems from the teachings of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, the founder and first head of the Soviet State, the centenary of whose birth will be celebrated in April 1970. Lenin was a consistent champion and an indefatigable fighter for the national and social liberation of oppressed peoples; he firmly believed in their approaching victory over imperialism and bequeathed to the peoples of the Soviet Union the duty of establishing lasting brotherly friendship and co-operation with the peoples fighting for their liberation. The Soviet Union is strictly fulfilling these Leninist behests. 48. It is necessary to put an end to the violations of Security Council resolution 253 (1968). The Council must in no uncertain terms require all Governments to sever their economic trade, military and all other ties with the racist regime at Salisbury. 49. The USSR supports the General Assembly recommendation that the scope of sanctions against the racist regime in Southern Rhodesia should be extended to include all the measures envisaged in Article 41 of the Charter, and that sanctions should be applied against South Africa and Portugal, whose Governments have openly refused to carry out the mandatory decisions of the Security Council. 42. The basis of the Soviet Union’s foreign policy with respect to such peoples has been clearly defined in the decisions of the twenty-third Congress of our Party. In the words of the documents of the Congress, 50. In their statements at this morning’s meeting of the Council, the Secretary General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Algeria, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Zambia, the representative of Senegal and other representatives of Asian and African countries expressed specific views on precisely what urgent and effective measures must be taken by the United Kingdom against the criminal gang of racists running amok in Southern Rhodesia. The United Kingdom representative should pay greater heed to the voice of Africa, to the fierce anger and justified admonitions heard in the statements of these representatives of the peoples of Africa. “ . . . The Soviet State will continue to render the utmost support to the peoples fighting for their liberation and work for the immediate granting of independence to all colonial countries and peoples, promote all-sided co-operation with countries that have won national independence and help them to develop their economy, train national cadres and oppose neo-colonialism,” 43. Today, in condemning most energetically the criminal policy pursued by the Southern Rhodesia racists against the Zimbabwe people and those imperialist forces which are aiding and abetting them in that policy, the delegation of the Soviet Union expresses its firm conviction that the just cause of the Zimbabwe people will triumph, that it will win its freedom and independence, and that the shameful and criminal regime of the Southern Rhodesia racists-the regime of exploiters and oppressors-will be.wiped from the face of free Africa. 51. As to the United Kingdom, as the administering Power it should take effective action against the racist minority Of Southern Rhodesia to secure the unconditional implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, by holding general elections in Southern Rhodesia on the basis of a “one man-one vote” basis, and immediately handing over power to a government of the majority.

The Finnish delegation welcomes the initiative taken by fifty-eight African and Asian States in calling for this urgent meeting of the Security Council as an opportunity to consider the situation in Southern Rhodesia in the light of the plan of the illegal regime of Mr. Smith to hold a referendum on proposals for a new constitution. The gravity of the situation is underlined by the presence here of prominent representatives of two African States, who have travelled to New York to put before the Council the concern of Africa about the threat to peace and order inherent in the continued suppression of the black majority in Southern Rhodesia. What they had to say this morning could not fail to impress all of us around this table. 54. The constitutional proposals on which a small minority of the population of Southern Rhodesia will vote upon 20 June are clearly as illegal as the regime itself. They are designed to provide a cloak of legality for the continued suppression of the African majority and to perpetuate the supremacy of the white minority. They hold no prospect for any political advancement for the African people. In fact, they would bar majority rule for all time. This is stated with brutal frankness in the introduction to the constitutional proposals, which says that the old constitution was objectionable chiefly because it provided for eventual African rule and did not guarantee that the Government would be retained in what is called “responsible hands”. The suppression of the African majority thus enshrined as a basic principle of the proposed constitution would be enforced by all the measures of a police state including arbitrary arrest, preventive detention and censorship of news media. 55. On another level the constitutional proposals claim to establish an independent republic, and it is obviously the hope of the illegal regime that this would lead to international recognition of Southern Rhodesia as an independent State. It is essential, therefore, that the Security Council, as has already been suggested by several members, should speedily and unanimously condemn the constitutional proposals and call on all States not to recognize the illegal regime in Southern Rhodesia. It must be made clear to the white minority that the world community will continue to refuse to have anything to do with the illegal regime. 56. The constitutional proposals, if adopted, while they would not change the actual conditions prevailing in Southern Rhodesia, clearly reveal the refusal of Mr. Smith’s regime to contemplate any settlement based on the principle of majority rule which the British Government, rightly, has upheld. In this sense the referendum has political implications which the Security Council cannot overlook. 57. The Finnish delegation agrees with Ambassador Shahi and others who have proposed that members of the 58. The profound disappointment that all of us must feel about the slow pace with which the policy of sanctions is evolving and the obvious deficiencies of that policy shouid not lead us to underestimate the historic significance of the unanimous decision of the Security Council /‘14.&Q/r meeting] to apply universal and total economic sanctions, not to stop aggression in a classical sense of the world, an aggression of one State against another, for which the provisions of Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter were originally intended, but to stop what might be called aggression against human rights committed by one race against another. The fact that such a decision could be reached in this Council reflects a fundamental reassessment of values in international life-the virtually universal acceptance of the truth that the world community, if it wishes to promote an orderiy evolution of international relations, can no longer tolerate the persistence of mass violations of fundamental rights and freedoms, such as those practised today in Southern Rhodesia. It is true that the illegal regime continues to survive in an economic sense, but it survives as an outcast with no hope of ever gaining international recognition or establishing normal relations with others. Thus, what has been achieved so far by the United Nations in the question of Southern Rhodesia is surely an impressive demonstration on behalf of the equality of races and the rights of man. On this basis we should be able to join our efforts in a search for agreement on practicable and effective means by which we cart achieve our common purpose. 59. Mr. MORALES SUAREZ (Colombia) (translaifedfrom Spanish]: My delegation has studied, with due attention to the background material made available to the me:mbers of the Council and to the circumstances described in the course of the debate, the situation we are examini.ng in the territory of Southern Rhodesia. 60. Although, as is obvious, my delegation is acting on its own behalf, it cannot but bear in mind the origin of the principles on which it bases its international actionprinciples that are common to the nations of Latin America, which find in them an immutable element of their cohesion. Those principles lead us to repudiate and reject anything which hinders the self-determination of peoples, anything which denies the essential equality of men, anything which interferes with the full and effective exercise of basic human rights. 61. My delegation is greatly alarmed at the imminence of an act of constitutional reform such as that planned ln Southern Rhodesia, which is specifically aimed at making

My delegation takes part in this debate with special interest. For the first time it has to speak on this question in the Security Council, although in the past we have had occasion in the Fourth Committee.. of the, General Assembly to define our position, which is clear and unequivocal: it condemns and repudiates a unilateral declaration of independence_ which we have never recognized, since it is designed to perpetuate some non-existent rights of an imported white minority against the inalienable rights of the indigenous population of the territory. 64. It is the people of Zimbabwe who are entitled to self-determination and independence. Hence, the adoption of any new constitution reaffirming the supremacy of a minority which is alien to the territory seems to us to be contrary to all the principles contained in the Charter of the United Nations and in the decisions of its main organs, the General Assembly and the Security Council. 65. Today we are resuming our consideration of the situation which has arisen, but before going into the subject, my delegation wishes to express its appreciation for the interesting contribution made both by the Secretary- General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Algeria and by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Zambia. We extend our welcome to both those distinguished personalities. 66. To you, Mr. President, who are of Spanish stock and belong to a community of peoples linked in brotherhood by a co,mmon tradition, culture and language, I address a special greeting and wish you every success-similar to those which marked the terms of office of the Presidents of this important body in April and May. 67. In my delegation’s view, the referendum in Southern Rhodesia constitutes an extremely serious problem, not only because by its misapplication it constitutes of itself an action which is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to all the norms of equity, but also because it seeks to legalize a situation which will later tend to be consolidated by the mere fact of its having been held. We all have in mind the recent rejection by the General Assembly of another referendum, in which an imported population was also asked to vote on the future of a territory. In that case, as perhaps in this, an attem$ was made aposteriori to have recourse to the very device of a referendum in order to maintain a typically colonial situation, Consequentb, we do not agree with those who try to underestimate its importance. 68. We respect the good intentions of the administering Power to put an end to the rebellious situation of Southern 69. Accordingly, we believe that the consultations which the United Kingdom says it is going to hold with other Governments, and particularly the African Governments, should begin immediately, without waiting for the results of a referendum which-in view of the very circumstances under which it will be held-are a foregone conclusion and cannot be taken into consideration on any account. 70. As far as my delegation is concerned, what is important is that we should realize exactly what are the real causes of the present situation. What we are dealing with is Purely and simply a confrontation between an indigenous people, with natural roots in its territory, and the alien presence of a group of colonists imported in the course of history, who are seeking domination by force, That is the real essence of the problem-an aftermath of colonialism which desires to perpetuate itself and which involves racial confrontation. 71. My delegation cannot conceal its concern at the steady deterioration of a situation which is not being combated effectively enough by the responsible administering Power. We approve of the good intentions voiced by the United Kingdom representative, but we believe that the lateness of the hour calls for more urgent action, 72. Apart from the decisions which this Council may decide to adopt once the debate is concluded, my delegation wishes to emphasize at this stage that, in its view, so long as the situation remains unchanged and the administering Power continues to be legally responsible for the territory, it is for that Power to continue to take all possible steps to implement United Nations decisions. Otherwise, it will incur a grave responsibility which we do not think is at all the intention of the United Kingdom Government. 73. I believe that today we are examining two cardinal aspects of the many problems afflicting the world. One is the use of an imported population to displace an original population, in order to perpetuate an odious situation. The other is the capacity of this Organization to ensure the observance of its agreements and resolutions. 74. Rhodesia is the example before us at present, but the very gravity of this case should remind us that there exist in other parts of the world, and for the same reasons, situations of similar tension or gravity, which will necessarily be affected by our decisions today. 75. I am not seeking solutions which cannot be impIemented. My delegation merely wishes to point out that, beyond Rhodesia, what is at stake is the authority of this very Organk&ion, and with it-let us not forget-the peace of the world. 76. Either we impose respect for law and order on all, or we shd have failed in an undertaking which affects every one of us. 78. In this comrexion, it is not out of place to state that some of the features of the so-called “Republican Constitution” now to be submitted to the white racist minority for its approval go even beyond the repressive measures practised in the Republic of South Africa. All the apparatus of a legalized fascist dictatorship, such as censorship, preventive detention, restriction, abolition of the appeals system after a trial on certain charges, compulsory powers to search and seize property, the denial of bail, as enumerated in the British %eral newspaper The Guardian, are there in this so-called “constitution”. Ian Smith and his cohorts have gone so far this time that even their most hardened supporters in the West cannot find their usual words to justify this latest challenge to elementary human rights. 79. A mere reading of the introduction to the so-called “constitution” explains the embarrassment of Ian Smith’s apologists in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. The introduction states: “The Government of Rhodesia believes that the present Constitution is no longer acceptable to the people of Rhodesia because it contains a number of objectionable features, the principal one being that it provides for eventual African rule and, inevitably, the domination of one race by another . . .“. 80. To avoid “domination” by 95 percent of the Rhodesian population, that is the Zimbabwe people, the new text assures the continued domination by the 5 per cent, that is the white settlers. 81. The only conclusion we can draw from all this is that if it were true that colonialism meant to prepare the colonialized peoples for self-determination, the British colonial authorities have singularly failed in achieving their stated aim in Zimbabwe. 82. Looking back to our earlier discussions and the conclusions the Council has reached on this issue, there can be no denial that the road charted by the administering Power, the United Kingdom, to meet the challenge of the Smith regime has failed completely. It is small comfort to US that our conviction that the half-hearted measures adopted in place of genuine, effective steps to eliminate the racist rebellion in the heart of Africa would prove counterproductive has been fully vindicated. Nor can we feel much pleasure at the fact that the repeated prophecies about the success of the sanctions, applied in the well-known piece- 83. The United Kingdom, instead of using force to subdue the rebellion, has, through the policy of piecemeal sanctions, reduced the Security Council to the role of a. passive on-looker and thus helped the Smith regime to gain precious time. The racists in Salisbury now feel strong enough to challenge world public opinion in the most brutal manner. The responsibility for this intolerable situation must be borne by those who have refused all along to act in the only way that could have led to results, that is, by putting down by the use of force the racist rebellion in Zimbabwe. This responsibility is all the greater as the present situation in the territory is bound to affect international peace. 84. My delegation feels that the abandonment by the United Kingdom of its responsibility for the people of Zimbabwe is very difficult to explain. Were it not for the fact that that Government has never hesitated to use its armed forces against the national liberation movernents of its colonies, it would be easier perhaps to appreciate its strong opposition to the use of force in this case. However, the well-known events in dozens of dependent Territories entailing the widespread use of force, coupled with hundreds and thousands of arrests, including those of some of the most eminent national leaders of those lands, cannot but reinforce the impression that the only reason for refusing to act in this case in the usual manner lies in the colour of the skin of Mr. Ian Smith and his accomplices. It is evident that there is similarity and even parallelism in approach and interest between the administering Power and the racist usurpers of power to establish a clea.rly neocolonialist system, to strengthen the political, social, economic and military grip over the indigenous African population of Zimbabwe. The sending of troops to the island of Anguilla and to other parts of the world and the refusal to do so against the illegal Smith regime cannot be explained in any other way. 85. However, when all is said and done, the problem facing our Council now is this: what can be done after the collapse of the policy of sanctions. The Council obviously cannot remain idle when basic human rights are violated, when the right of self-determination enshrined1 in our Charter is trampled underfoot in the land under the misrule of Ian Smith. In the view of my delegation, the Council has

From the time when the Council was first seized of the problem of Southern Rhodesia to this day there has been general agreement on the objectives to be achieved. The Council has been unalterably opposed to the illegal regime in Salisbury and has on various occasions adopted resolutions aimed at bringing that regime to sanity and reason. At first it was believed that the economic and financial measures put into force by the United Kingdom Government, with the support and co-operation of the United Nations, would be sufficient to accomplish that. When those measures proved futile the Council, at the instance of the United Kingdom, took another step in December 1966, namely, the imposition of selective economic sanctions for the purpose of inflicting damage on the economy of Rhodesia to such an extent as to convince Ian Smith and his associates that, unless they came to terms with London, their regime would have no future to look forward to. But that again failed. On 29 May 1968 the Council unanimously adopted resolution 253 (1968), imposing comprehensive and mandatory economic sanctions. 87. More than a year has passed since the_n. There is no doubt that Southern Rhodesia’s foreign trade has been hurt in many areas. By and large, however, the impact has not been as serious as might have been expected. The Ian Smith regime still remains in firm control of the country. The white minority in Southern Rhodesia now seeks the perpetuation of its position of domination and supremacy through an illegal referendum, scheduled to take place on 20 June. 88. It seems to my delegation that the first order of business before this Council must be to condemn the projected referendum and constitution in the strongest terms and with no equivocation. The mere act of condemning the referendum would, of course, not prevent the Ian Smith regime from doing what it had set out to do. The world community cannot be satisfied until that regime is overthrown. The United Nations cannot shirk its responsibility for the protection of the rights and interests of the indigenous inhabitants of the Territory. Indeed, the responsibility of the United Nations does not end with the overthrow of the Ian Smith regime; it will continue until the indigenous inhabitants are enabled to exercise freely the right of self-determination. 89. On this basic objective there has been no disagreement. There are, however, differences of opinion as to the most effective measures to be applied to bring this objective about. It is now clear that the mandatory sanctions embodied in resolution 253 (1968) have produced no decisive impact. This being so, the question remains as to how resolution 253 (1968) may be supplemented by more effective means. My delegation is prepared to support any appropriate action the Council may find it possible to take in this regard, 91. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): I do not wish to keep the Council at this late hour, but I feel that I should say a word or two of reply to the speech which was made just now by the representative of the Soviet Union. I would say that our debate today has been at a high level, and I was sorry that at this late hour it should have been debased. The speech of the representative of the Soviet Union was as inaccurate as it was offensive, and his abuse was equalled only by his ignorance. I shall not seek to take many examples, thougl~ I could well do so; I shall take only one. He referred, in his ignorance, to the-1 use his words- “miserly reduction”1 of British trade with Rhodesia. The trade of my country with Rhodesia prior to the illegal declaration of independence was considerable. It has been stopped. My country has honestly and thoroughly carried out the obligations which we assumed. No country has done more. The stop in trade between my country and Rhodesia is complete. No country, as a result of the sanctions imposed in this Council, has suffered sacrifice greater than the sacrifice of my country. So when the representative of the Soviet Union talks about a “miserly reduction”, his remarks are certainly as inaccurate as they are offensive. 92. It is not surprising that the representative of the Soviet Union should be the advocate of force in this Council, as his country has shown itself the employer of repressive and ruthless force in recent circumstances of which the whole world is only too well aware. 93. I would say respectfully to the representative of the Soviet Union that he has the same obligation as the obligation of the representative of the smallest country represented in the United Nations. He has the obligation tc keep a civil tongue in debate.

I now call upon the representative of the United States whc wishes to speak in exercise of his right of reply. 95, Mr. BUFFUM (United States of America): I too regret that it is necessary to detain the Council at this late hour to correct what I fear may be some erroneous impressions, to say the least, that were given by the Soviet Ambassador’s statement, However, I shall detain the Cound for but one moment. 96. First, Ambassador M&k commented on trade between the United States and Southern Rhodesia. I wish to assure this Council that my Government scrupulously applies the economic sanctions which the Council has imposed on Southern Rhodesia. Indeed, our trade with that country has been reduced by 90 per cent since 1965; and of the remaining 10 per cent, none-and I repeat, none-to the best of our &wledge is in ViOhtiOn of any of he mandatory provisions of the Council’s reSOhtiOnS. 1 Cited from the interpretation.

1 now call upon the representative of the Soviet Union, who has also asked to speak in exercise of his right of reply.

In his reply, the noble lord gave us an example of courtesy and of how not to insult speakers. I shall not follow his example and shall not indulge in personal insults. 100. The experience of history shows that when United Kingdom representatives have no facts with which to refute the real situation under discussion in the Council, they invariably resort to slander against the Soviet Union. 101. But anti-Sovietism has not helped the United Kingdom representatives or their country. They have engaged in anti-Soviet propaganda for more than 50 years but the results are clear to all: they have reaped neither advantage nor glory, nor honour from their anti-Communist and anti-Soviet policy. 102. As to the United Kingdom’s economic relations with Southern Rhodesia, suffice it to refer to United Kingdom sources, For instance, the United Kingdom reference work Who Owrzs Whom states that nearly 400 British companies have affiliates in South Africa and more than 190~in Southern Rhodesia. The list includes, as I said, the largest British and imperialist monopolies: Unilever, Shell, British Petroleum, Associated Electrical Industries, Courtaulds, etc., etc. 103. According to The Financial Times, which is another organ of British big capital-British investments in Southern Rhodesia amount to &200 million sterling, or more than US $500,000 million, of which 2150 million sterling is invested in the mining industry. The same United Kingdom sources also provide other data. In 1968, the monopolies invested more than 21 million Rhodesian pounds (more than US $50 million) in Southern Rhodesia. 104. British and American capital dominate The Anglo- American Corporation of South Africa, an ore-mining concern, Since 1967, the Corporation has been expanding and speeding up its nickel-mining in Southern Rhodesia, investing $10 million sterling for that purpose, 10.5. According to a recent report, in The Times of 11 April 1969, another firm, The Anglo-American Company, is purchasing one million shares of The Messina (Transvaal) 106. Does that show my ignorance, my lord? I ,wonder which of us is more ignorant when it comes to real facts? 107. Do the millions invested in Southern Rhodesia constitute sanctions? Is this the way to help the Zimbabwe people to free themselves from the domination and tyranny of a tiny group of racists? There you have them-the sapper methods you are using against Southern Rhodesia. No slander of the Soviet Union and its policy will avail or will convince the Africans. Facts are stronger than slander-have always been and always will be. 108. I do not quite understand Ambassador Buffum’s reply. I never accused Ambassador Yost of anything. I merely mentioned something he had said. Consequently, I do not quite understand your need to reply. I only wanted to put it more strongly that if Smith, the leader of the Southern Rhodesia racists, says that he is defending Western civilization by the methods he is using in Southern Rhodesia, then God save the peoples of Africa, and the world from such a civilization! I do not see that that contains anything offensive to Ambassador Yost, and I see no need for Ambassador Buffum to come to his defence.

I give the floor to the representative of the United Kingdom, who wishes to exercise his right of reply. 110. Lord CARADON (United Kingdom): Mr. President, I certainly have no wish, and I am sure you have no wish, that we should prolong our proceedings. But I would like to tell the representative of the Soviet Union that the obligations that we undertook in this Council in regard to sanctions have been fully carried out and that our obligations in regard to the investment of capital have been fully carried out, our obligations in regard to trade with Rhodesia have been fully carried out, and he will not be able to show, by any figures of previous investment or of any other figures which may be produced, that my country has failed to carry out its obligations to the full and faithfully.

As I have no other names on my list of speakers, I pr’opose, in accordance with Council practice, to make a brief statement as representative of PARAGUAY. 112. At this stage in our debate, I have little to add to what has been said with so much eloquence and feeling at our two meetings today on the subject of the situation in Southern Rhodesia. The statements we have heard recall to my mind the words of a distinguished United States author and jurist: in certain circumstances, he said, it is better to repeat the obvious than try to elucidate the obscure. 113. The position of the Republic of Paraguay on the question of Southern Rhodesia is patently clear. It has been set forth on numerous occasions in this Council, in the IO 115, In the case of Southern Rhodesia, this abhorrent and abhorred policy is assuming fresh manifestations of the utmost gravity, as pointed out in the letter from the fifty-nine Members of the United Nations which we are discussing. Those manifestations and designs, and the acts which the illegal regime in question intends to carry out shortly, in fact within a few days, deserve our unreserved condemnation; we already consider them illegal and hence devoid of all legal effect, even though they take the form of an alleged new constitution which has no rother purpose than to perpetuate an inhuman and immoral system of oppression exercised by a white minority over the vast majority of the indigenous population. 116. In these circumstances, my delegation is prepared to hold with other delegations whatever consultations are 117. Finally, and even at this late hour, we trust that the action of the international community will hasten the time, so long delayed, when the Zimbabwe people can exercise freely and without restriction its genuine and legitimate right of self-determination and of controlling by itself its own national destiny. 118. Speaking again as PRESIDENT, there are no other speakers on my list and I therefore propose to adjourn the meeting. Before doing so, I should like to thank the members of the Council for the infinite patience they have shown and to remind them, even if that is unnec.cssary, that by virtue of this office and his function, the President will as usual remain at their disposal to serve both them and the Council. 119. In accordance with the informal consultations that have taken place, the next meeting of the Council to consider the question of Southern Rhodesia will be held on Tuesday, 17 June, at 3 p.m. The meeting rose at 9.45 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations publications 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 des Nations Unies sont en vente dons les libroiries et les ogsnces deporitoires du monde entier. Informez-vous aupr&s de votre llbroirie ou odresssz-vous bz Nations Unies, Section des venter, New York ou GenBve. KAK flOnYYHTb M3AAHMFl OPTAHMSA~MH 06bEflHHEHHblX HAublfl ~h,lUllll O~~r~~llll:ltll~il~ 06'L~~IIllClllllJX ~kll~ll~ 5101110 KVlIIIT~ n iillll~tilll~lS Jl~rLl:lllllaX'II :ll'CIITI'TIIIS II0 IWL'S IUlilOllM Mllp. IhnO~llTC UlpMUill Ck ll:l~allllllS ll IIZIIIIPY lillllilillOl uara:muc ILlI UIIUIIITC 110 n,qwcy : OgrallnaaqrlJi oihc~rlllelllll,lX IItIl~rlii. CCKIIIIH uo Il~O~llXC Il:l~a1lllil, IhO-1lOl~K n.in KKOllCBa. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Los publicacianes de Ias Naciones Unidas estdn en venta en librerios y cosos distribuidoros en todas porter del mundo. Cons&e a su librero o dirijase a: Nociones Unidos, Secci6n de Ventos, Nuevo York o Ginebro. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies) 82065-Navember 1972-PBS43