S/PV.1487 Security Council

‘Before the Security Council takes up the item before it, I trust that members will permit me, on their behalf and my own, to extend warm congratulations to the United States delegation and to the Government and people of the United States on the unprecedented feat in the history of mankind which United States scientists have just achieved, in niaking it possible for human beings to land and walk on the moon. We wish to express our admiration and pride to these human beings, to these astronauts whose courage the whole world must hail. 2. In setting foot on the moon, they have opened up new vistas for us and it is to be hoped that all mankind may benefit. The emotion which gripped us all at that moment strengthens our conviction that all men on earth, whatever their nationality, feel closely united. 3. Why, then, should we tear each other apart on this earth on which we live when, in future, we shall no longer be able to use the expression: “You’re asking for the moon” appositely when speaking to someone who seems to be demanding the impossible? 4. Truly, the historic event which we lived through last Sunday and Monday, by breaking the bonds which have imprisoned us for thousands of years, has conferred upon man csw and urgent responsibilities towards his fellowman, to whom he is linked in solidarity and for whom he should seek happiness and peace. The men of science have done their duty; we now expect the economists and financiers to do theirs. 5. In any case, at this solemn moment, it is our heartfelt “For one priceless moment in the whole history of hope that the exploit of the gallant American astronauts man, all the people on this ear% are truly one, one in may’be the first ray of a dawn of prosperity and freedom for all who live here on earth.

Mr.President, I wish to express my deep thanks to you for your statement, as well as to the Secretary-.General for his statement yesterday. We are grateful for these generous expressions of praise on the landing on the moon by Apollo 11. 7. This has indeed been a historic occasion, perhaps in fact the most memorable that any of us will have an opportunity to witness during our lifetimes. As Americans we are naturally proud of the courage and the skills of our astronauts as well as the genius of those thousands ‘of unnamed scientists and technicians who made this flight possible. At the same time, and I want to make this particularly clear in this forum, we are most conscious that this latest and greatest step in space is not an accomplishment of and by the United States alone, We are well aware that we carry with us into space a heritage of history, for the wisdom which has made this venture possible represents an accumulation of knowledge which has been contributed by every culture, in every age and from every quarter of the globe. We know too that, as we enter this new dimension of human existence, the hopes of all mankind for a better and more peaceful world go with us. 8. We are also well aware’of the role that this Organization plays as man pushes back this last frontier. We recognize, for aexample, that the law governing our activities on the moon has been laid down in a treaty which was negotiated by the Outer Space Committee of this Organization, a law which provides that the moon shall be the province of all mankind. These are reasons, I might say, why the astronauts have carried with them a flag of the United Nations, as well as the flags of all States that are Members of the United Nations and members of the specialized agencies. 9. Obviously, there is nothing that we can say here today that can add lustre to the drama we have seen played out before our eyes this past weekend. Perhaps nothing we say here could be a more fitting reflection of the spirit in which this mission was accomplished than the plaque the astronauts have placed on the moon for posterity;which reads: “We came in peace, for all mankind.” 10. I believe that, as we wait in the next anxious hours for Apollo 11 ‘s return, President Nixon has conveyed a message to the astronauts that spoke faithfully for all of us when he told them : The agenda was adopted. Letter dated 15 July 1969 from the Permanent Representative of Zambia addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/9331)

In accordance with the decision taken at our previous meeting, I invite the representative of Portugal to take a place at the Council table. At the invitation of the president, Mr. B. de Miranda (Portugal) took a place at the Council table.

I wish to draw the attention of the members of the Council to the fact that the repre$entative of the United Republic of Tanzania, in a letter dated 18 July 1969 (S/9341/, has asked to be allowed to participate in the debate on the question before t,he Council. In accordance with the provisional rules of procedure and the practice of the Council, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite the representative of Tanzania to participate in the debate, without the right to vote. .At the invitation of the President, Mr. M. A. Foum (United Republic of Tanzania) took a place at pi;<? Council table.

I have also just received a letter dated 22 July 1969 [S/9348] from the representative of Somalia, asking to be allowed to participate in the Council’s debate on the question before it. With the consent of members and in accordance with the provisional rules of procedure and the practice of the Council, I propose to invite the representative of Somalia to participate in the debate, without the right to vote. At the invitation of the President, Mr, A. A. Farah (Somalia) took a place at the Council table.

The Council will now consider the item before it, First, however, I should like to draw the attention of members to the letter dated 18 July 19691 addressed to the President of the Security Council by the representatives of thirty-two African States on behalf of the Organization of African Unity. To these thirty-two States should be added the Ivory Coast, whose representative has just addressed to me a letter dated 22 July 19691 asking that the Ivory Coast be included as a co-signer of the letter of 18 July 1969 supporting the request that the Security Council be convened. 15. The first speaker on my list is the representative of Hungary. I now give him the floor. 17. I now turn to the item an ‘the agenda of our meeting, At the request of the Government of Zambia, the Security Council is called upon to discuss a very serious act of aggression committed by Portugal against a young, independent African country, Zambia. Portugal launched a sizable attack by its air force and infantry units, killing and wounding innocent civilians and destroying their homes. This premeditated and co-ordinated ruthless action covered extensive areas of Zambia. The representative of Portugal explained the situation in a peculiar way: at a certain stage “the Zambian Government decided to open its territory to hostile activities against Angola and Mozambique”/1486th meeting, para. 681. 18. In fact, all Zambia did was to abide by the relevant resolutions of the United Nations, having given shelter to the refugees of Angola and Mozambique, victims of the Portuguese colonizers. Portugal not only refuses to abide by the resolution of the Security Council and General Assembly, but uses the policy of intimidation and terror against a country which, fulfilling its international obligations on the basis of the United Nations Charter, supports the freedomloving people of Angola and Mozambique, whose struggle has been recognized *as legitimate by the United Nations. In an &ffort to annihilate the refugees of Angola and Mozambique, to stamp out the fire of national independence and to suppress all possible assistance to them, the Portuguese armed forces brutally attacked Zambian villages, which resulted in many casualties, 19. It seems that in the eyes of the Government Of Portugal the implementation of United Nations decisions constitutes a casus belli. But that is a direct attack on the very foundation of our Organization. On the other hand, they call the activities of Angolans and Mozambicans hostile to Angola and Mozambique. But that, firstly, is complete nonsense and, secondly, a gross and misleading distortion of the facts, We have to state here that these people are fighting Portuguese colonialism. They are against the forces of obscurantism and their aim is independence and progress, all in unison with the most noble ideas of mankind, with the provisions of the Charter and with numerous United Nations resolutions, including, in the first place, General Assembly resolution 1514 (Xv) of 14 December 1960. 21. The Portuguese colonialists are conducting a three-fold war: a brutal colonial war against the African peoples, a political and immoral war against the United Nations and a desperate struggle against the changing times, trying to perpetuate nineteenth-century colonialism. They do not shrink from violating elementary principles of international law by attacking an independent country and infringing its territorial integrity. No justification can be accepted for the brutal attack of Portugal against Zambia, and no further violation of the Charter can be tolerated. We should put an end to this practice of the law of the jungle, and Portugal should abide by the norms of valid contemporary international law, recognizing the right of all peoples to self-determination. 22. We have been discussing for quite a long time in the United Nations, as a special item, the situation prevailing in African colonies under Portuguese administration. Since the adoption, of the Declaration on decolonization, the General Assembly and the Security Council have several times been compelled to face the deteriorating situation in the Territories under Portugal’s administration resulting from its refusal to comply with the resolutions of those bodies. In spite of several resolutions of the world Organization, and in defiance of world public opinion, the Government of Portugal has been intensifying its suppressive activities and military operations against the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and so-called Portuguese Guinea, as well as its aggressive acts against the independent African States, some bordering the Territories under its administration, some situated farther away, like the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Republic of Senegal, the Republic of Guinea and the Republic of the Congo (Brazzaville), as indicated in the letter2 just submitted by thirty-three African States to the President of the Security Council. 23. It is common knowledge that Portugal is a small country, economically and financially, and militarily weak. And yet, how can this small country be successful in pursuing a colonial war against the peoples of Africa and in defying the resolutions of the United Nations? Were it not for the economic military support of its NATO partners, the Portuguese Government would not be capable of resisting the national liberation movements. 24. The facts and experience of the recent debates in the Security Council on Namibia and Southern Rhodesia 2 Ibid, 25. For the grave situation created by the aggression against the peace-loving people of Zambia, the Government of Portugal must bear full responsibility and is liable to pay reparations for the damages. But all those countries which, against the clearly expressed position of the United Nations, have provided financial and military assistance to Portugal, helping its policy in contravention of international law and the United Nations Charter, have to share the grave responsibility for the serious events. 26. The position of the Government of the Hungarian People’s Republic is clear and firm. In brief it is: first, the right of all peoples to self-determination, independence and territorial integrity should be respected; secondly, Portugal should be condemned for committing aggression against Zambia and for suppressing by force the liberation movement of the peoples of Angola and Mozambique; thirdly, Hungary supports Zambia’s just and defensive fight in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter and its’ claim for appropriate reparations’for the damages resulting from the Portuguese aggression.

The next speaker on my list is the representative of Somalia, on whom I now call.

Mr. President, my delegation wishes to thank you, and through you, the members of the Security Council for allowing it this opportunity to express its views on some of the issues that are involved in the complaint of the Republic of Zambia against Portugal. 29. It is not the intention of my delegation to enlarge on the details of the complaint lodged in the Council by the Republic of Zambia, for this has been well presented by its representative. But before passing on to a consideration of some wider implications of the complaint, I feel it important to emphasize that the Portuguese authorities have committed no fewer than 66 separate acts of aggression against the Republic of Zambia over the past three years. The exemplary restraint displayed by the Government of ‘Zambia in the face of such provocation deserves no’; only our commendation but also our acknowledgement that it is dedicated to the cause of peace. The Republic of Zambia has not only refrained from exercising its right under Article 51 of the Charter to take defensive action to repel the aggressor, but has afforded Portugal every conceivable opportunity to make amends for its lawless conduct through the medium of bilateral negotiations. 30. What, then, are some of the significant issues seen in the conduct of the Portuguese authorities against this 3 1. It will be recalled that, immediately after attaining independence, Senegal was obliged in 1961 to lodge a complaint with the Security Council against violations of its territory and air space by Portuguese armed forces. In 1963, Senegal was again compelled to protest in the Council about the bombing of its territory by four Portuguese aircraft. I In 1964, the Portuguese aggression shifted to the territory of another African State, Guinea. In October of that year, the Government of Guinea informed the Council that, in view of the deliberate provocations and repeated violations of Guinean air space by Portuguese aircraft, the Government of Guinea had given orders to its troops stationed on the border to put an end by the most effective means to any further intrusions by Portuguese aircraft. Evidently this is the kind of language Portugal understands, for since then there has been no further complaint from Guinea. 32, Senegal was again forced to protest to the Security Council, towards the end of 1964 and in February 1965, charging further violations of its air space and territory by the Portuguese armed forces. These complaints were followed by a complaint from the Government of the Congo (Brazzaville) in the same period, charging repeated incursions into its territory by Portuguese soldiers. 33. In 1966, there were complaints about Portuguese aggressions from Zambia, the Republic of the Congo (Brazzaville), the United Republic of Tanzania and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The protests related to violations of their air space and territory by the bombing of frontier villages by Portuguese aircraft, the mining of roadways by Portuguese troops and armed incursions and as&Its against their territory by Portuguese troops. 34. What, then, is behind these aggressive acts which the Portuguese authorities repeatedly commit despite censure by the United Nations? The reason for them is that the Organization of African Unity has pledged itself to give all possible support to the liberation movement in the African Territories under Portuguese rule in their struggle for self-determination and independence, Furthermore, Portugal would like the worid to believe that the unrest and turmoil that is rampant in three African territories over which it claims sovereignty is attributable not to the social, political and economic demands of the populations, but solely to the importation of ideas and assistance from neighbouring independent States. 35. The numerous acts of aggression of the Portuguese authorities are symptoms of a disease, While those symptams must be. dealt with by the Security Council, the cause of the disease must also be recogaized. The chief reason for the complaints against Portugal which repeatedly come before the Council is the refusal of the Portuguese authorities to transfer political power and sovereignty to 36. Conscript labour, political repression and social discrimination were factors which resulted in th’e Angolaur revolt of 1961, that has enveloped the country and spread to Mozambique and so-called Portuguese Guinea. Memhns of the Council are aware that these widespread revolts have entailed great human suffering. Apart from the mani; thousands of dead and wounded, the repressive acts of rhe Portuguese have created enormous refugee probtems. According to a report by the United Nations Ili& Commissioner for Refugees, there were on 30 June I%!$ 448,954 refugees from the Territories of Angola, Mozxnbique and Guinea sheltered in the neighbouring African States of Zambia, Senegal, the United Republic of Tanmi;s and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, With half a million refugees yearning to return to their homeland 2nd with the African population within the Territories intensi. fying their armed struggle against the colonial overlordship of Portugal, it is not surprising that Portugal finds its colonial crown uneasy’ to wear. Nor is it surprising, &at Portugal should look for others upon whom to pin rh:: cause of its worries. 37. Another of the wider aspects of the problem oi Portuguese aggression against independent African Sutn. and an equally disturbing one, is the fact that S&I aggression is related to Portugal’s alliance with the tad racist regimes of southern Africa: South Africa anll Southern Rhodesia. This alliance is of course based &,Q ;a community of interests which includes the belief thnr a stranglehold on the so-called Portuguese provinces in Afr& can be maintained with the military and economic atiil,. ante of these racist regimes, particularly South Africa. Ia ii no secret that when the South African Defence Minialrr gave a dinner in honour of General Horatio Rebelo. 1?t2 Portuguese Minister of Defence on 10 February 1969. t;e was able to say that South Africa and Portugal were co-operating in combating the destructive forces of uhlt they termed international communism. General Rebelo L.& in return that the balance of power in southern Afti; depended on the stability and strength of South Afriia. that Portugal had contributed to that balance and was @ad to have South Africa as a friendly neighbour. The follosiag day the Portuguese Minister of Defence added in lohanucs. burg: “I am sure that Portugal with Angola and Momm bique can join with South Africa to build a great ftiia against foreign aggressors”. 38. The Defence Minister, according to The CcFc Ti,rrfl of 12 February 1969, also stated that South Africa mj 39. The true significance of the racist alliance in southern Africa, is best described by the following extract from the Manifesto on Southern Africa issued in Lusaka on I6 April I969 by the Heads of State and Government of East and Central Africa: “The present Manifesto must, therefore, lay bare the fact that the inhuman commitment of Portugal in Africa and her ruthless subjugation of the people of Mozambique, Angolia and so-called Portuguese Guinea are not only irrelevant to the ideological conflict of powerpolitics, but’. . , to”the . . . philosophies and the doctrine practised by her Allies in the conduct of their own affairs at home. The peoples of Mozambique, Angola and Portuguese Guinea are not interested in communism or capitaIism; they are interested in their freedom. They are demanding an acceptance of the principles of independence on the basis of majority rule.“3 40. The Portuguese authorities, my delegation submits, would do well to reconsider their attitude towards the people of Africa and assess whether co-operation with them would not give better returns than an alliance with the evil racist forces of southern Africa. As the Lusaka Manifesto points out, ‘&An independent Mozambique, Angola or Portuguese Bissau may choose to be as friendly with Portugual as Brazil is. That would be the free choice of a free people .” 41. It seems to my delegation that a consideration of these wider aspects of the matter before the Council should ensure the strongest condemnation of Portugal for its acts of aggression. Furthermore, the Council should take cognizance of the fact that the situation in Africa caused by the presence of Portuguese colonialism requires a comprehensive examination by the Council. Note should be taken of the fact that as far back as 1962 the General Assembly, in its resolution 1819 (XVII) on the situation in Angola, expressed its conviction that the colonial war being carried on by Portugal and its refusal to implement the provisions of General Assembly resolution I.514 (XV) constituted a source of international conflict and tension as well as a serious threat to world peace and security. 42. I submit that the situation created by the recent aggression of Portugal against the Territory of the Republic of Zambia also merits the most serious consideration of this Council and the strongest condemnation.

The next speaker on my list is the representative of the United Republic of Tanzania, on whom I now call.

May I, Mr. President, express the sincere thanks of my delegation j For the text of the Manifesto, see 0fFciuZ Records Of the General Assembly, Twenty-fourth, Session, Annexes, agenda ‘item 106, document A/7754. 45. It is because of these reasons that my delegation has found it necessary to request permission of the Council to participate in the present debate. 46. It is common knowledge, it is knowledge shared by every member of this Council, that Portugal, the cause of Zambia’s present complaint, for more than four centuries has depended on its colonies for its survival. It has exploitad and plundered those African territories, under the pretext of the cynical and flimsy claim that the colonies are being governed for their own good 01 that they are part of Portugal and the Iberian Peninsula, Of course, this dreamlike idea has been rejected by all free-thinking men. 47. The people of the colo;iies of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) have long since refused to be cheated by these hollow Portuguese claims, as rightly they should, in the defence of their motherlands. They have therefore taken up arms to fight for ,their freedom and have been scoring substantial victories. The oppressed people of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) have been particularly encouraged by the outstanding achievements of the rest of free Africa-and Zambia stands proudly in that line-since those nations attained their independence. They have steeled themselves in their struggle and have been encouraged by the commitment undertaken by the countries of Africa within the Organization of African Unity to support them. They have been encouraged too by the recognition of the United Nations that their struggle is legitimate and the call of the United Nations to all peoples that stand for the freedom of man to render them moral and material assistance. 48. The liberation struggle which is taking place in the whole of southern Africa, coupled with the remarkable economic, social and political reconstruction now going on in all independent Africa, has completely foiled Portuguese colonial policy in that part of the world. Portugal’s 50. The Council has at various times been called upon to consider with the requisite urgency provocative actions and violations committed by the Portuguese Government, as I said, against several African Member States of this Organization. It should be wise to recall that as far back as 1963, when similar violations were committed against Senegal, or 1965, against the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Council deplored such violations and called upon the Government of Portugal to take the necessary action to prevent such violations of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the African States. 51. We in the United Republic of Tanzania have not escaped Portuguese acts of aggression. On various occasions the Portuguese colonialists have intruded into Tanzania, bombing villages and killing and wounding innocent civilians. Equally serious provocative and aggressive actions have been undertaken against the Republic of Guinea and against the Republic of the Congo (Brazzaville). 52. It would have seemed that the warnings given to the Portuguese Government by the highest organ of the United Nations would suffice, as many believed they would, to bring about the desired result-that is, the immediate and complete cessation of such gross violations and infringements of the sovereignty of independent African States. The passage of time, however, and the development of events have shown, as do indeed the, facts in the present case, that the fascist forces of Portugal are bent on continuing with such aggressive acts, threatening peace and security. 53. Portugal’s primary aim is, without any doubt, to cover up its failure to maintain an unchallenged grip on the African Territories which are under its occupation. Portugal has failed to defeat the glorious liberation movements in Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau). Indeed, the peoples’ national liberation movement is moving from strength to strength; it is doing so because it depends on the force of the masses of the people, and it is receiving the support of the freedom-loving peoples of the world, primarily because the United Nations has recognized the legitimacy of the struggle of those peoples and has called upon them to render moral and material support to those struggling to regain their freedom and to liberate themselves. This is a commitment which the African people, the members of the Organization of African Unity, have undertaken. Portugal, to cover up its failure, now wants to create political confusion in independent African countries. 54. Last Friday, the representative of Zambia gave this Council (1486th meeting] a detailed account of Portuguese acts of aggression against Zambia since 1966, and he 55. Portugal knows that Zambia and the United Republic of Tanzania border the colonies of Angola and Mozambique and that therefore whatever happens in Zambia or Tanzania is bound to influence events in those colonies. Portugal therefore regards a united, peaceful and prosperous Zambia as a threat to the forces of exploitation in those Territories. The Portuguese colonialists are thus doing all they can to create political and economic confusion inside Zambia. In their opinion, as colonialists normally think, a weak Zambia would be much easier to control, and this, in their twisted thinking, would sound the death knell for the liberation struggle in southern Africa. 56. But the commitment of Zambia, the commitment of all Africa, should dispel any such illusions. Africa has suffered and endured all kinds of atrocious acts committed by the forces of imperialism aimed at subjugating and exploiting the peoples of Africa and the rich resources of the continent. Thousands upon thousands of the daughters and sons of Africa have heroically laid down their lives for freedom and prosperity, as enjoyed in other parts of the world, and for the progress and peace of mankind. It is therefore only natural that the primary concern of the free peoples of Africa today-and I repeat: Zambia stands proudly in those ranks-should be the total liberation of the continent from the pernicious system of the exploitation of man by man. 57. The Portuguese Government, supported by its allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is representative cf that pernicious system in Africa. The Portuguese Govern ment, to date, has expressed itself by word and deed an avowed enemy of African liberation and, in prosecuting a vicious, genocidal war against the peoples of ,Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau), has shown itself tc ha against peace and progress; Portugal is maintaining this irresponsible policy because of the substantial support it receives from its allies within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Portugal is the standard-bearer of imperialism in southern Africa: The records of the United Nations clearly support this proposition. 58. In its resolution 1542 (XV) of 1.5 December 1960, the General Assembly recognized that in the Territories under Portuguese domination the denial of the peoples’ right to freedom constituted “a threat to the wellbeing of human. ity and to international peace”. Again, in its resolution 59. Furthermore, this very organ, the Security Council, by various resolutions, determined-and particularly in the words of its resolution 180 (1963) of 31 July 1963-“that the situation in the Territories under Portuguese administration is seriously disturbing peace and security in Africa”. 60. It is universally recognized that the forces of colonialism, having been abolished from the rest of Africa, have established the last bastion in the southern part of Africa. We, the African people, have no illusions about the forces involved or what they represent. These forces are the forces of imperialism which manifest themselves directly in the form of the evil system of apartheid of the regime in Ijretoria and the’ illegal racist minority rkgime in Southern Rhodesia, as well as the Portuguese colonialists and, most prominently, the internatioqal monopolies that support and hence encourage those forces of imperialism. 61. To date, Portugal has not come out of the slumber and’ reconciled itself to the fact that Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) are not integral parts of any European State. Therefore Portugal has stubbornly and viciously unleashed a war against the people. In the prosecution of its criminal war against those people, the Portuguese Government has shown itself an apt student by adopting the aggressive concept of “hot pursuit” followed by its imperialist trainers. In fact, the representative of Portugal in this very chamber, obviously taking a cue from other forces that have made similar contentions before, has indicated clearly that it considers this illegitimate concept as a natural practice. 62. Artide 25 of the Charter unambiguously maintains that: ?he Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter”. I suggest that the Portuguese Government, by statements in the various organs of the United Nations, including the Security Council, and by its actions against the African people as exemplified by Portuguese aggression against the Republic cf Zambia, has defiantly expressed itself as unmindful of this very basic concept. This is also a very pertinent and important aspect directly relevant to the substance of the present debate. We feel fully justified in asking: will there be no end to the gross flouting of United Nations resolutions, the Security Council resolutions included? This ffouting of the resolutions is done by Portugal and those allies among the Western countries that support it within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. 63. By its resolution 218 (1965), the Security Council, after reaffirming its own resolution 183’ (1963) and General Assembly res@ution 15 14 (XV), urgently demanded of Portugal, inter alia: (a) the immediate recognition of the right of the peoples of the Territories under its administration to self-determination and independence; (b) the immediate cessation of all acts of repression and the withdrawal 64. I ask: have the provisions of that resolution, among others, been implemented? The answer is obviously and emphatically no, The CounciI would not have been sitting now if the Portuguese Government had accepted and carried out the Council decisions demanding that it cease and desist from acts of repression and concede immediate independence to the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau). The Council would not have been sitting if the Portuguese Government had accepted and carried out other decisions of the Council demanding that it desist from acts of violation and infringement of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of independent States bordering the enclaves under its colonial domination. 65. Portugal has ,refused to abide by earlier decisions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. The Portuguese Government continues to commit acts of aggression against Zambia and other independent African States. This is a very dangerous trend which, unless checked in time; may escalate to proportions fraught with the most grave consequences. It would appear that Portugal, encouraged by the substantial support it receives from its NATO allies, is unmindful of the consequences that may result from its irresponsible and criminal policies and actions against the peoples of Africa as a whole and, as exemplified in the present case, against the people and Government of Zambia. 66. The attitude of the representative of Portugal in this Council has revealed that Portugal has still not drawn any lesson from the historical development of society. It still maintains an attitude characteristic of the forces of imperialism, of rejecting legitimate and factual charges against it en bloc. These tactics have been used in virtually all debates relative to the aggressive actions of the Portuguese Government. The representative of Portugal in this chamber has sought to draw the Council’s attention away from the serious charges which Zambia has preferred against Portugal. 67. From what has been said, it should be easy to see the pattern being followed by the forces of reaction, by the forces of imperialism: they seek to turn back the clock of history; they seek to perpetuate the inhuman system of colonialism, to suppress the legitimate struggle of the people for liberation and to intimidate independent States, by brute force, into submitting to the dictates of imperialism . 68. The United Republic of Tanzania is, and other independent States of Africa are, fully and unquestionably 69. Zambia is a part of Africa that is committed to these noble principles for the liberation of Africa and for the attainment of international peace and security. That is why Portugal, the standard-bearer of imperialism in southern Africa, is committing these acts of aggression against Zambia. 70. Portugal represents an obvious threat not only to those Territories to which it clings illegally, but to all African countrieh. The aggressive actions of Portugal reveal this. It has violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Zambia not once, not twice, not a dozen times, but more than sixty times. The Security Council has determined before, as I said earlier, that the actions of the Portuguese Government in Africa seriously disturb peace and security. The presentation of the charges made by Zambia clearly indicates that the continuing violations being committed by Portugal are very seriously threatening peace and security. 71. The Security Council, which under the Charter has the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, should therefore once and for all direct a serious warning to the Portuguese Government to stop all its acts of vandalism and aggression against Zambia and the African people. The activities of Portugal, infringing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Zambia and causing 72. Finally, Tanzania, if I need to reiterate this, fully endorses the just complaint of the Republic of Zambia against the Portuguese imperialist aggressors. It is our hope and conviction that the Security Council will, without reservation, endorse and recommend the demands made by Zambia. 73. In conclusion, I cannot fail, while saluting the just and clear stand of the people and the Government of Zambia, to salute the heroic soldiers of liberation of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau), and to express the conviction of the African people as a whole that they shall move from victory to victory, striking blow after blow, until they make the Portuguese colonialists leave the shores of their motherland.

I have no other speakers on my list. If no other representative wishes to take the floor at this stage of the debate, I shall adjourn the meeting. Following consultations with the members of the Council, it has been agreed that next meeting will take place on Wednesday, 23 July, at 3 p.m. The m.eeting rose at 5.05 p.m. HOW TQ OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Molions publications may be obloined from bookslores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your booksfore or write to: United Nations, Soles Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Ler publications des Nations Unier sonI en vente dons ICI librairier et les agencer diporitaires du monde entier. Informer-vour ouprir de votri libroirie ou odresrez-vour 21: Naflonr Unies, Section der venter, New York ou GenCve. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicociones de lar Nacioner Unidor ertbn en venta en libreriar y cosos dislribuidoror en lodes pdrter del mundo. Consulte o sv libreio a dirijose o: Nociones Unidos, Seccidn de Ventos, Nuevo York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies) SZlzo-November 1972-2,050