S/PV.1490 Security Council

Iri accordance with the decisions taken at previous meetings of the Council, I invite the representatives of Portugal, the United Republic of Tanzania, Somalia, Kenya, the United Arab Republic, Liberia, Madagascar, Sierra Leone, Tunisia, Gabon, and the Dempcratic Republic of the Congo, to participate in the debate of the Council, without the right to vote. At the invitation of the President, Mr. B. de Miranda (Portugal) took a place at the’ Council table, and Mr. M. A. Fount (United Republic of Tdnzania), Mr. A. A. Farah (Somalia), Mr. A. E. Osanya-Nyyneque (Kenya), Mr. A. El-Erian (United Arab Republic), Mr. L. H. Diggs (Liberia), Mr. B. Rabetafika (Madagascar), Mr. F. B. Savage (Sierra Leone), Mr. M. Mestiri (Tunisia), Mr. J. Davin (Gabon), and Mr. J. K. Nguza (Democratic Republic of the Congo) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber.

My delegation enthusiastically congratulates the delegation of the United States of America on the extraordinary exploit achieved by the astronauts of Apollo 11. Mr. President, allow me to make the following statement on the item now before the Council. 3. On a previous occasion, I considered it appropriate to express the idea that the adoption of the agenda implies that the Security Council sets a limit on its own work, asjs usually the case in deliberative bodies, Consequently, my delegation’s task will be confined to a consideration of the case submitted by Zambia in the letter circulated in document S/9331. I must point out, as a general precedent, that my delegation has frequently had occasion to express its anti-colonialist position in the most categorical manner. That position derives from the very basis of the structure of the Colombian nation. 4. Having established this, and coming back to the particular case before us, my delegation must express its natural concern arising from the occurrence of events which aggravate an extremely disturbing general situation. We feel that an examination of this situation by the parties concerned with a view to finding a just solution to the problem should not be ruled out. My delegation considers that, even now, this procedure might be considered by the Security Council. 5, The PRESIDENT (translated porn French): I now invite the representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President and members of the Security Council, my delegation duly appreciates the honour you have done it by authocizing it to participate in this debate in which, once again, a Member State of the United Nations-in this case, Portugal-has arrogated to itself the right to engage in military intervention in the territory of another Member State, Zambia. Before speaking on this important matter, however, I hope you will allow me, on behalf of the delegation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, to pay tribute to the delegation of the United States of America on the occasion of the historic and unprecedented exploit of Apollo Il. Of course, when we read Jules Verne, our dreams were drawn to that unknown planet. And, of course, when we followed the heroes of the Belgian writer Herg6, namely, Tintin, his dog Milou, Captain Haddock and ProfeSsor Tournessol in their adventures written for young people from 7 to 77 years of age, we were carried away by the tehptation to discover the mysteries of the moon. And have we not dreamed of the moon when following the episodes of “Star Trek” on television? But all that was only science fiction, and how surprised we were to learn, on 20 July, that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin had really walked on the moon! Thank God they have also come back safe and sound, bringing us samples which will perhaps help mankind to perfect its technology. 8. I should like to ask my friend, Ambassador Buffum, when he transmits the sentiments of the Members of the United Nations to the astronauts, simply to say to them on behalf of my delegation, for their courage and for all they have done: “Thank you, gentlemen.” 9. Now I must turn to mankind here on earth, so full, alas, of vicissitudes; misunderstanding and intolerance. We must admit that at this time when mankind is rightly rejoicing over the progress of technology, it is to be feared that the Latin dictum “Homo homini Eupus” forms the basis of human relations. 10. The Council has met to discuss some most unfortunate acts occasioned by authorities of a Member State of an Organization which has sworn to achieve the noble aims to which all men aspire. As the members of the Council will recall, my country, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, has been obliged on three occasions to lodge a complaint against Portugal in connexion with acts of open aggression and manifest interference in the internal affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 11. On all three occasions, in 1966 and 1967, this Council unequivocally condemned Portugal’s misdeeds with regard to my country. And it was no surprise to us in the Congo to learn that the same country has perpetrated similar acts against a fraternal country which shares with us the fate of other neighbours of the African territories still suffering under the most inhuman oppression in the last stronghold of the colonial era, of evil memory. My country could not remain silent in this debate; it had a duty to denounce forcefully the aggressive acts perpetrated by the soldiers of Lisbon against Zambia, a country which has age-old affinities with the Congo, ’ 12. In his statement at the 1486th meeting, the representative of Zambia, my distinguished friend Ambassador Mwaanga, gave specific details regarding some 60 flagrant violations suffered by his country. He cited places, dates, people killed or kidnapped, and even the origin of the weapons employed in these intolerable crimes. Villages burned, people killed or kidnapped, women violated, property looted-can this Organization, which has sworn to protect mankind from the scourge of war, enjoy the sight of that picture, even in bare outline? 13. In response to all these details provided by the Zambian delegation, the representative of the Lisbon ,Government has been content merely to make a general, and cynical denial. My delegation expected that, of course. We in the Congo have no more illusions: We know that, even when caught red-handed, Portugal is in the habit of 14. The representative of Portugal has told us that his Government prefers to negotiate disputes, and that it has done so in good faith, Obviously, negotiations are not conducted in good faith if the acts under discussion are repeated at the very time the negotiations are taking place, That is certainly not called good faith, but arrogance, as Ihe representative of Zambia has so rightly said. The Portuguese delegation then told us that: “When, in a case or two, it wa found that the fault lay an ths Portuguese side, tha Portuguese Government immediately expressed regret and paid the amount of compensation demanded by Zambia”’ [148&h meeting, para. 811. 15. The representative of Portugal, therefore, admits that his country has, at least on some occasions, violated Zambian territory, Of course, he speaks of only one or 1%~ occasions, but we need not hold that against him; this admission calls for congratulations on the attempt at objectivity, It reminds me of the story of a professor at 21 university where the members of the faculty were required to have been brilliantly successful each academic year during their own university studies, One professor whose file, discovered after the war, showed that before getting his final degree he had failed five times in a single academic year, was immediately called before the administrative board, Unable to deny the facts, he defended himself by saying: “But it’s not true! I only failed four times,“Thus. if out of the 60 specific acts of aggression against Zambia, Portugal admits to only two, that in no way alters the fact that there have been deliberate violations of the Charter, 16. Moreover, I have just received a cable from Kinshasa proving Portugal’s bad faith, Everybody knows that, in ils resolution 241 (1967) adopted on 15 November 1967 following a complaint lodged by my country againat Portugal, the Security Council condemned any act of interference by Portugal in the internal affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Previously, in ils resolutions 226 (1966) of 14 October 1966 and 239 (1967) of 10 July 1967, the Council had condemned Portugal for its acts of aggression against the Democratic Republic ob the Congo. The Lisbon Government, accustomed as it is ZO piling up the resolutions of the United Nations in its dusty archives, has paid no attention to those resolutions either; since 1968, its representatives in Africa have perpetrated flagrant violations against the Democratic Republic of IhE Congo, It is true that there is a Swahili proverb which says-please allow me to quote it in the original language- “Mulimokuwa chunvi hamkosi utamu”, which might bc translated as ‘A leopard cannot change its spots,” 17. Mr. President, with your permission and with the Council’s indulgence, I should like to give you the folluwing details regarding Portuguese violations of the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo: (a) On 13 April 1968, there was a Portuguese raid.on the village of Mbaka-Kosi, in the territory of Lukula in Central fcl On 18 May 1968, Portuguese terrorists dropped thirty bombs on the villages of Kinsudi and Kimfidi, in the territory of Madimba in Central Congo. The toll taken by these crimes was 10 dead and 6 seriously wounded. /d/’ On 24 June 1968, a second Portuguese bombing attack completely destroyed the village of Yongo, 3 kilometres inside the frontier. (cl On 9 January 1969, a Portuguese commando unit violated Congolese territory in the district of Katende- Tshifoy, where it committed acts of vandalism and banditry and kidnapped peaceful Congolese citizens. (f) On 3 March 1969, 15 Portuguese soldiers violated the Congolese area of Luena in order to recruit men, but the villagers fled. (gj On the night of 6-7 May 1969, 20 Portuguese terrorists surrounded the village of Chilofu, in the same area, and machine-gunned the sleeping population, which fled panic-stricken, every man for himself. (h) On 17 April 1969, a horde of Portuguese violated Congolese territory in the Luena area and terrorized the village of Fumbelo where they even carried off four Congolese citizens, 18. Of course, the representative of Portugal will deny all the’se facts, My delegation will listen to his complete denials with the indifference bred by habit. But what my delegation cannot accept is the arrogant kind of justification by the representative of Lisbon of what he terms “Marauding bands” or “rebels” who, in the Portuguese representative’s words, supposedly commit acts of aggression from Zambia against “the Portuguese provinces in Africa”. Portugal has already used the same words about my country in speaking of the heroic struggle of the peoples of Angdla, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau). 19, The representative of Portugal, however, can scarcely be unaware of the fact that he cannot permit himself, here, within the halls of the United Nations, to offer such justifications which are offensive to the Organization of which Ms country is a Member. To be a member of an organizatian, to adhere freely to a United Nations covenant does not mean merely to have rights, such as the right to sit and speak in this great assembly. Membership in an organization also involves obligations on the part of the State which is a party to a covenant, even though such obligations may not always suit that State. 20, Now, Portugal obviously knows that from the standpoint of the United Nations, Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) are not Portuguese provinces. They are, as the speakers who have preceded me have emphasized, 21. Consequently, if there is a country living outside the terms of the United Nations Charter and perpetrating acts of aggression against innocent peoples and independent African States, it is indeed Portugal. 22. It is hardly necessary to mention the resolutions which Portugal has simply trampled underfoot: General Assembly resolutions 1807 (XVII), 1819 (XVII), 1913 (XVIII), 2107 (XX) and 2184 (XXI) and Security Council resolutions 163 (1,961), 183 (1963) and 218 (1965), to name only a few. 23. The record of Portugal’s violations of the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council is sufficiently eloquent in itself for anyone who wishes to be convinced of the indignation which Portugal’s colonial policy arouses in world public opinion and of Portugal’s bad faith when it accuses the Zambian Government of violating the United Nations Charter. 24. The truth is that the Zambian Government, like other African countries including my own, has responded in the affirmative to the appeal which the General Assembly, in its resolution 2107 (XX), paragraph 3, has addressed to all States: “in co-operation with the Organization of African Unity, to render the people of the Territories under Portuguese administration the moral and material support necessary for the restoration of their inalienable rights”. It is the positive assistance which the African countries render to the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau), in response to such appeals by the General Assembly, which Portugal describes as acts of aggression and for which it wishes the Security Council to blame the Zambian Government. , 25. Even if Portugal has lost its sense of reality, it should not expect to involve the Security Council, this important body, in its illogicality and its injustice by recommending that the Council should blame those who respect its decisions and the decisions of the General Assembly, and, no doubt, congratulate those, including Portugal, who systematically refuse to comply with the resolutions of the United Nations, The Portuguese justifications are legally wrong and politically arrogant. No, Mr. President, Portugal deserves to be condemned forcefully and unequivocally. 26. We Africans are peaceful people. We have no ambition to annex either European territories, or territories in the American continent, or any other territories. Besides, we have no means to do so. All that we ask is that we be left in peace. Leave us alone with our resources, which are said to be limited, to seek any co-operation we wish for the development of our people. Leave the peoples of Angola, Mozambique, Guinea (Bissau), Zimbabwe, Namibia and 27. May this humble voice of Africa be heard in this lofty Council, Distinguished members of the Council, it is UP to you to speak now.

The next speaker on my list is the representative of Portugal, on whom I now call. 29. Mr, MIRANDA (Portugal): In his intervention yesterday /1489th meeting], the representative of Zambia descended once again to a low level of insulting language. Each one does as he knows best; and my delegation has no doubt that the Zambian representative did the best that he knows. My delegation is not surprised. As I said at the 1486th meeting, irisult is the last argument of one who does not have right on his side. In trying to maintain ‘an untenable accusation the Zambian representative has distorted the clear meaning of many of the statements I made in the previous meetings. I will not waste the time of the Council by repeating them. I shall limit myself to drawing attention to my previous statements. 30. However, I shall briefly refer to a few remarks made by the Zambian representative yesterday. He called the Luso-Zambian mixed commission mythical. It is quite easy for me to prove that the Luso-Zambian mixed commission is very real and also that Zambia attributed great value to it, 31. It will be recalled that in my statement I referred to the correspondence exchanged at the highest level between Portugal and Zambia. The Zambian representative accused Portuguese forces of blowing up the Luangwa Bridge in 1968. That accusation is gratuitous and false, as Zambia was told even at that time. The Luso-Zambian agreement was signed after that. It settled all previous allegations made until then on both sides. 32. The Zambian representative has mentioned refugees, alleging that we have planted mines to prevent both their escape and their return to harvest their crops. That allegation is self-contradictory, On the other hand it amounts to an admission that the displaced persons are willing to return to Portuguese territory, as indeed many have returned. We have always welcomed them. The mines have not been planted to prevent their return, They have been planted in Portuguese territory to make the terrain difficult for raiders infiltrating from Zambia. 33. The Zambian representative has mentioned three or four men supposed to have been killed on 24 January 1969. We know of none. The Zambian representative has mentioned “our nationals”-that is, Zambian nationals-“who had gone hunting near the Angola border”. I need hardly comment on this amusing euphemism for raiders. He has also referred to kidnapped Zambians as an alibi for infliltrating raiders and he has tried to make it a bargaining point for the return of the two Portuguese military persons detained in Zambia. Even if there were kidnapped Zambians in Portuguese territory-there are none-the return of 34. I have already explained to the Council the alleged case of Lushindu. At this stage I wish only to repeat what I said at the 1488th meeting, that our investigation of the case continues. We have not yet arrived at definite conclusions about it. Be that as it may, there is a world of difference between populations crossing frontiers for their own .private purposes and a Government authorizing and protecting armed attacks across frontiers as Zambia does and admits doing. 35. Finally, the Zambian representative said that the talks were broken off because right from the start of those talks in London we became intransigent. All bilateral talks start by each party giving its own version; discussion comes only after that. Zambia gave its version and we gave ours. That is what happened in London. But even at that preliminary stage Zambia decided to come to the Council without any notice to us that the talks were going to be abandoned by it. The decision to come to the Council was taken independently of the talks. I am sure the Zambian representative will not deny this. Or will he? 36. My delegation will not deal with allegations falling outside the scope of this debatt?. We will limit ourselves to placing on record our rejection of all such allegations made in the course of this debate.

I thank you, Mr. President, for giving me the floor again. I apologize for having to speak at this stage, since I have already spoken at length during two of the meetings that we have held during the last seven days. 38. I should like to thank the representative of Portugal because each time he speaks he seems to supplement the information which I have given the Council, and any supplementary information given to the Council, in the view of my delegation, is always welcome, He has con. firmed a number of points I made in my speeches at both the 1486th and 1489th meetings, for which I am most grateful to him. I also wish to assure him that what he described as my “best”, of yesterday, was indeed not the best that we can produce. 39. I want to reiterate the position of my Government in regard to the incidents to which he has referred. I stated yesterday and I state again that out of the 61 or so incidents which occurred on our frontiers with Mozam. bique and Angola only three incidents were investigated and only one of the three was settled. The Portuguese soldiers who were rightly released by our High Court in Lusaka as a demonstration of the impartiality of our judiciary, unlike that of the r&me in Lisbon, have been detained by my President under the Preservation of Public Security Regulations. I stated that if Portugal is prepared to release the Zambian nationals who have been kidnapped We shall make immediate arrangements to release the Portaguese soldiers currently being held. If, on the other hand, 44. Mr. N,GUZA (Democratic Republic of the Congo) (translated from French): I apologize, Mr. President, and beg the indulgence of members of the Council, for making another statement when the Council was perhaps about to adjourn. 40. I know that the representative of Portugal is very desperate. He has listened to one speech of condemnation after another. The simple rules of human decency will not permit him even at this late hour to make any desperate attempt whatsoever to save his face. 45. I simply wish to say that, as was to be expected, the representative of Portugal has hastened-on this occasion without even taking time to think the matter over, as in his custom-to reject wholesale the evidence which I have adduced to corroborate his bad faith concerning the acts of aggression committed against our sister Republic of Zambia, It is, of course, easier to deny everything than to defend what is indefensible. I hope that members of the Ccuncil have taken note of this point. 41. We have complained about Portuguese aggression. We have tabuhated our case. We have given all the facts which, one by one, he has not attempted to answer. I wish to inform him that this Council, perhaps unlike the NATO Council which he is used to, has certain rules of decency. We are opposed to aggression by one State against another, and it is the wish of the Zambian Government and the hope of all peace-loving peoples throughout the world that Portugal will not escape the utmost condemnation for the aggression which it has committed against Zambia. We are used to the diatribes with which he has outlining his case. We have heard them over the years. We are totally unimpressed and we reject them, as we did at the 1486th and 1489th meetings.

I have no other speakers on my list. If no representative wishes to speak at this stage in the debate, I propose to adjourn the meeting. Following consultations with the members of the Council, it has been agreed that our next meeting will take place on Monday, 28 July, at 10.30 a.m.

I wish only to state that there are no Zambians detained on any Portuguese territory. The meeting rose at 4.50 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Naiionr publications may be obtained from bookstores ond distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Notions, Soles Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publicotioru des Nations Unier sent en vente dons les librairies et ler ogencar dhpositoires du monde entier. Informer-vour ouprLs de votre libroiric ou adresser-vows b: Notions Unies, Section des venter, New York ou Geneve. KAK FlOJlY’ihlTb M3AAHMt-l OPrAHH3A~HH 06bEAHHEHHblX HAulblti COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Los publicocioner de los Nociones Unidos est6n en vcnto en librerios y cosos distribuidoros en todos porter del mundo. Cons&e o su librero o dirijore a: Nocioner Unidas, Sscci6n de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebro. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies) 8213S-November 1972-2,050