S/PV.1557 Security Council

During the consultations which have been taking place since the last meeting of the Security Council a draft resoiution has been prepared; it is contained in document S/9980. This text appears to have the support Of all members of the Council. However, during the consultations which I have held with members of the Council concerning this draft resolution, the French delegation repeated the reservations it expressed at the 1556th meeting, when the Council discussed the same question. That delegation has nevertheless “3. Decides that the present sanctions against Southern Rhodesia shall remain in force; “5. Further urges all States, in furtherance of the objectives of the Security Council, not to grant any form of recognition to the illegal rhgime in Southern Rhodesia; “6. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.” 3. As no representative has asked for the floor, we shall proceed immediately to the vote on the draft resolution S/9980. A vote was taken by show of hands. I ~ ~ The draft resolution was adopted unanimously.’

I shall now give the floor to delegations wishing to explain their vote.

We voted in favour .of the draft resolution contained in document S/9980 because it basically reaffirms all the previous Security Council resolutions on this question. We must of course register our bitter disappointment that the Secirrity Council has not been able to pronounce itself on the question of no independence before majority rule. 6. It is a matter for regret that the Government of the United Kingdom saw fit to veto the resolution which would have met this important objective, despite the positive votes of twelve other delegations. The use of the veto on matters concerning .white minority rCgimes in southern Africa only serves to encourage those repressive rCgimes to continue defying world opinion. The Western countries must surely decide who their fi-iends are and who their enemies are. It will only hurt their economic and political interest in Africa in the future if they continue to pay lip service to freedom and independence by such cheap and painless demonstrations of sympathy through the reckless use of the veto. 7. Above all, the resolution we have just adopted will-in our opinion merely serve to supplement the armed struggle of the people of Zimbabwe, and it is on this understanding that we have just cast our vote in favour of this draft resolution.

My,delegation has cast its vote in favour of the draft resolution contained in document S/9980. Following useful suggestions made at: our last meeting, this resolution takes note of the third report of the Sanctions Committee in its fifth preambular paragraph, something the earlier draft had failed ’ See resolution 288 (1970). “Calls upon the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as the administering power in discharge of its responsibility to take urgent and effective measures to bring to an end the illegal rebellion in Southern Rhodesia and enable the people to exercise their right to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and in conformity with the objedtives of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960.” 9. My delegation is not entirely satisfied with the last preambular paragraph, which contains vacillating and tendentious wording. We would have preferred a direct, simple paragraph such as the one contained in document S/9976 and in every resolution adopted by the Security Council since 16 December 1966. 10. By resolution 232 (1966) the Security Council determined that the situation in Southern Rhodesia constituted a threat to international peace and security, and took certain measures under Chapter VII of the Charter. Since that time the situation has not improved; on the contrary, it has visibly worsened. In so far as the Security Council has seen fit to take those measures, the question of Southern Rhodesia becomes a matter of world concern and, above all, a matter of shared responsibility-the United Kingdom, as the administering Power, naturally sharing a substantial measure of that responsibility. In that light my delegation does not see any contradiction in saying that the administering Power bears primary responsibility in the matter and at the same time urging that Power to take certain measures to meet that responsibility. 11. My delegation further considers that, in so far as the Security Council is acting in this case in discharge of its supreme responsibility in terms of Chapter VII of the Charter, it is hardly proper to say that the manner in which the settlement is to be made will be determined solely.at the apsolute discretion of a particular national authority. In the light of the Council’s consideration of the matter sin’ce November 1965, and in particular since the adoption of resolution 232 (1966), it is SO patently a matter of world concern that the Security Council is under an obligation to take or prescribe measures, as appropriate and necessary, for the resolution of the problem. The Security Council is dutybound, furthermore, to see that the settlement of the problem does in fact conform to the objectives it has itself laid down. And what are those objectives? The immediate concern is, of course, the overthrow of the illegal racist rCgime. But this is only a means to a* end. Our aim is the full and effective application Of the principles of self-determination of peoples in accordance with the Charter and, more specifically, in conformity with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV). In every substantive resolution adopted hy the Security Council subsequent to the illegal declaration of independence we find this objective stated and re- 12. The representative of France agreed with the substance of that draft resolution, and, according to the representative of the United States, the aim of the Council and of each of its members was selfdetermination and majority rule in Southern Rhodesia. 13. Lord Caradon, the former British representative, assured the Council again and again that as far as the British Government was concerned there would be no betrayal of African interests, that any settlement which would be arrived at had to be acceptable to the people of Rhodesia as a whole, and that his Government had no intention of abandoning the fundamental principles of democratic government, majority rule, selfdetermination and racial equality. At the 1475th meeting on 13 June 1969 Lord Caradon proclaimed the pledge of the British Government to the Security Council and the people of Southern Rhodesia in the following words: 17. The people of Southern Rhodesia have long lived with the colonial situation; they have been living with the racist minority rkgime and they will probably live with’any settlement that is reached, but the question remains: will they be satisfied with anything less than the total application of the principles of selfdetermination, majority rule and racial equality? “Of all the principles which have been stated and confirmed in the long consideration of this matter, the principle I have always thought most important is the principle that no settlement can be accepted which is not approved by the people of Rhodesia as a whole. In the words of my Government, that principle is ‘transcendent and overriding’ “.

My delegation supported the consensus resolution that we have just adopted. As has been pointed out, the resolution is a reiteration of the views already expressed and the measures already decided by the Council. Some of us may ask ourselves whether such a move is particularly constructive or necessary at this time. However, the present resolution, unlike its predecessor, does take account of the position of my Government which, as I explained when the Council last met on 10 November, is that we cannot accept any fresh commitment in the Security Council which would restrict the United Kingdom Government in its attempts to discharge its responsibility for Rhodesia. We have therefore been glad to be able to support the present resolution. 14. Sir Colin Crowe also stated at our last meeting that one of the five principles2 concerning the settlement of the Rhodesian problem was that any such settlement must be acceptable to the people of Southern Rhodesia as a whole. 15. For the same reasons for which we supported paragraph 1 of the draft resolution contained in document S/9976, we support paragraph 2 of the present resolution. The administering Power has assumed and continues to accept an obligation, and, if words have any meaning, that obligation is the granting of independence to Southern Rhodesia .in conditions acceptable to the people of that territory. Like the previous draft resolution, the present resolution does not seek to bind the administering Power to the “how” and the “when” Of a settlement; nor does it ask the British Government

I should like once again to express our thanks to the representatives of the United States and France for the understanding they showed a week ago. My thanks are especially relevant today because the statemeet by the Ambassador of France, Mr. Kosciusko- Morizet, and the position of the United States have shown that, little by little, they have left the position taken by the United Kingdom on the problem of Rhodesia, although it is true that they have not gone as far as they could go. to follow a new or a particular course of action. It states an obligation already stated and re-stated. That is what the previous resolution had intended to do, only in clearer terms. 16. My delegation appreciates that the administering Power seeks to keep open its options of negotiation vis-&.-vis the illegal minority rkgime. But we feel that in the eyes of the world, particularly in the eyes of the vast majority of the States Members of the United Nations, the question of negotiations with the Smith regime gives rise to certain misgivings. First, it is a 20. We certainly hope that they will continue to move in the direction of justice and human rights. 21. In extending my thanks, I can certainly not overlook all the other delegations that stood by us a week ago in our efforts to bring about the triumph of justice. I should have liked to mention everyone’s name, but even though I will not do so, I trust all governments and representatives will remain assured that they have earned our gratitude. ’ See Rhodesin: Proposals for a Settlement-1966 (London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, Cmnd.3159). 23. As regards the resolution just adopted, paragraph 2 makes a clear reference to the rights of the Zimbabwe people. We should like to issue a warning to the delegation of the United Kingdom not to shirk its responsibility if a handful of men endeavour to seize power in the present circumstances or in similar circumstances in the future. Paragraph 2 then reaffirms the responsibility of the Government in London to accord independence as soon as possible to the Zimbabwe people in accordance with the principles and ideals set forth in the Charter. 24. With the passage of time, world public opinion seems to have proven that the United Kingdom has been right in one respect, no Government, not even those of South Africa or Portugal, has formally recognized the Government of Ian Smith, However, we deplore the position of the United Kingdom. Instead of seizing this fine opportunity to put an end to this rebellion-which may be called a rebellion officially but which perhaps is encouraged by certain British circles-the United Kingdom has been satisfied with timid secret moves in accordance with the diktnt of Ian Smith, who judging from the position of the Conservative Government vis-8-vis the usurpers of power, has been the beneficiary of a hands-off policy. He can do precisely what he pleases, whereas in the normal course of events the Government in London should impose its will on Ian Smith. 25. It is really rather surprising to see the way the United Kingdom views reality. When democracy and human rights are at issue in the United Kingdom, those principles are praised and upheld to the greatest extent possible; but if the same principles are flouted and if it is required of the Conservative Government that the same principles be made a reality for Africans, they no longer seem to have the same importance. They are no longer called human rights and it is no longer a question of democracy. 26. Finally, the Security Council has every right to stress the responsibility of the United Kingdom. There is still plenty of time to act and act appropriately, but constant procrastination is very likely to lead us to an impasse which will be of benefit neither to the administering Power nor to the Conservative Government. It may well in fact be of benefit to the Zimbabwe people and to those who are in prison in the country now. We had hoped that the United Kingdom would make some sort of gesture to do something about the plight of those prisoners but nothing has been done to date; there has been nothing but talk. As I said the other day, those who are most concerned have 28. The sponsors of that draft resolution have today made statements strongly condemning those who blocked its adoption. For the second time within a year-and a year which marks the twenty-fifth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations-the world and all the Members of the United Nations have seen certain permanent members of the Security Council give direct support within the United Nations to the Southern Rhodesian racist rCgime. 29. Such a situation can do nothing to strengthen the United Nations or to enhance its effectiveness. It can only undermine the faith in the United Nations of the peoples of Africa and of the whole world. This serious event in the life and hisiory of the United Nations cannot be passed over or ignored. 30. The deep concern felt by African States and all other States and their peoples about the situation in Southern Rhodesia was also reflected in the new draft resolution submitted for our consideration by the President of the Security Council. Particular mention should be made of the active part played by our President in the drafting of this resolution. The text is extremely clear. It reaffirms the Council’s condemnation of the illegal declaration of independence in Southern Rhodesia and calls upon the United Kingdom as the administering Power to discharge its responsibilities, not to shirk those responsibilities and to take urgent measures to bring to an’ end the illegal rebellion of the racist rCgime in Southern Rhodesia, which has established a reign of terror and is oppressing the. overwhelming majority of the indigenous African population. 31, This resolution reaffirms decisions taken earlier by the Council, including the sanctions decision. An important and positive provision of the resolution which has been adopted is the one in which the Council deplores the attitude of those States which have Persisted in giving assistance to this terrorist racist rkgime. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Notions publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors thrwghout the world. Consult your bookstore or write tar United Nations, Sales Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUELICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Notions Unios sont en vente dans les libroities et ICI ogences dCporitoire.s du monde entier. Infarmez-vous o~lpr&s de votre llbrairie ou adressez-vous b: Notions Unies, Section des ventes, New York ou Gen&ve. KAK fIOIlY’1MTb M3AAHMfl OPTAHMBA~MM OFabEAHHEHHblX HAl(HiI COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLlCACtONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Los publlcocioncs de las Nacioner Unidas estbn en venta en librsrlas y cosas distribuidoros en todos parles del mundo. Consultc o su librero o dirtjose a: Nocioncs Unidor, Secci6n de Ventos. Nueva York o Ginebro. Litho in United Nations. New York Price: W.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies)