S/PV.1591 Security Council

I have received a letter from the representative of Yugoslavia which is in document S/10367, in which he requests that he be allowed to participate in this debate, without the right to vote. Following our usual practice, and with the consent of the Council, I invite the representative of Yugoslavia t0 take the place reserved for him in the Council chamber, on the understanding that he will be seated at the Council table when he wishes to speak. At the invitation of the President, Mr, L. Mojsov [Yugoslavia} too& the place reserved for him.

I have also received letters from the representatives of India and Pakistan, in which they request permission to participate in our debate on this item, without the right to vote. These letters will be distniuted as documents S/l0370 and S/10371, respectively. 4. In accordance with the usua! practice, and with the consent of the Council, I shaIl invite the representatives of India and Pakistan to take the places reserved for them in the Council chamber, on the understanding that they will be seated at the Council table when they wish to speak. At the invitation of the President, Mr. S. Sen (India) and Mr. A. Shahi (Pakistan) took the places reserved for them.

Before we continue consideration of the item on our agenda, I should like to inform members of the Council that the delegation of Pakistan is also a cosignatory of the letter in document S/10364. 6. I should also like to draw the attention of the Council’ to document S/10365, containing the text of the draft resolution co-sponsored by Burundi, Sierra Leone, Samalia and the Syrian Arab Republic, which was introduced at our 1590th meeting by the representative of Syria. 7. The fmt name on the list of speakers is that of the Foreign Minister of Guinea. I invite him to be seated at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, I should like to express our satisfaction at seeing you preside over the proceedings of the Security Council. This month the Council has a great deal of work to do, so many and so pressing are our concerns; but we know that you are a highly talented diplomat and a man of very remarkable qualities, and under your guidance the work of ,the Security Council will surely be carried out successfully. 9. My delegation once again thanks the Security Council for allowing it to participate in a debate the urgent, important and serious nature of which is clear to all. The Council is once again called upon to discuss a question of 10. On 5 October 1971, members of the armed forces and of the police force of the fascist South African Government, proceeding from the area of Narnlbla known as the Caprivi Strip, illegally penetrated Zambian territory. The aggressor, as is his wont, left his visiting card, The Government En question is the fascist regime of South Africa, which has built up apwtheid and racial segregation into a system of government; that racist rdgime whose continuously arrogant, bellicose and provocative attitude visdvis the international community no longer needs demonstrating. 11. Por the perpetration of its crime, the Government of South Africa chose a time when the Council, the body responsible for the maintenance of peace and security in the world, was meeting to debate one of the many monstrous acts of illegality committed by that Govemment: the illegal occupation of Namibia. It was that very moment that the South African fascists chose to attack and vioiate the territorial integrity of the Republic of Zambia, thus aiming a direct insult at the prestige of the Security Council and of the United Nations itself. 12. AS we said at the time, the brazenness of the Portuguese, South African and Rhodesian aggressors stems from the triple alliance by which they are bound and which characterizes them. The Republic of Guinea reaffirms its total support for the Government of Zambia, the victim of this act of aggression. Our solidarity with Zambia is all the more complete because we fully realize what imperialism is aiming at in attacking African countries that are resolutely and irreversibly committed to the side of the freedom fighters. In addition to$ntimidation by open threats, pressure and economic blackmail, the Portuguese and South African fascists are inflicting brutal aggression on independent African countries with a view to instituting their economic and political imperialism. 13. Following the monstrous act of aggression of which my country, the Republic of Guinea, was victim at the hands of the Portuguese colonialist forces, we stated in the Security Council, in November 1970 [155Uth meeting/, that a new era was beginning in the escalating violence levelled by colonialism against progressive African COLDtries. Today events have borne out our judgement and our assessment of the facts. I would remind the Council that in November 1970, when the Council’s special mission was sent to Guinea to hold an investigation there foIlowIng the criminal Portuguse aggression of 22 and 23 November, the Portuguese colonial forces repeated their attacks on 27 and 28 November on the northern part of Guinea. Portugal thus demonstrated, just as its South African ally is doing today, how little respect and consideration it has for the Security Council and for world opinion. 19. Two weeks ago, when President Moktar Ould Daddah, the current Chairman of the Organization of African Unity, came before the Council to argue Namibia’s case, on the instructions of all the African Heads of State, we in Africa hoped that his appeal would be heeded. Today, even more than yesterday, it is important for the Security Council to terminate the illegal occupation of Namibia by South 14. The Security Council will have noted the tragic similarity in the arrogant language and haughty attitude of 15. The Security Council will have noted from the lips of Mr. Muller himself that it was adverse winds that carrledb armed South African helicopters from the Caprivi Strip into the free and independent territory of Zambia. And-why not? -it was also adverse river currents that carried armed South African boats into the Republic of Zambia. What Mr. Muller refuses to admit before the Council fs the frequent overflights of ZambIan national territory by aircraft and helicopters of the South African forces; the frequent and regular violations of Zambian territory by South African and Rhodesian troops, and the crimes they commit against the peaceful population of Zambia. The whole world has not forgotten the threats on the part of the Prime Minister of the racist minority rdgime of South Africa to invade the independent Republic of Zambia. The reactionaries in South Africa have thus followed the insane example of the fascist forces of Lisbon in November 1970, when they invaded the Republic of Guinea. The resounding defeat inflicted on them will be echoed in the defeat which the courageous people of Zambia, rising up in arms, will inevitably inflict in their turn. 16. The iii that afflicts the Council and our Organization - as a whole is the notorious impunity enjoyed by the fascist Governments of Portugal and South Africa. This impunity would be impossible if Portugal and South Africa did not enjoy the support of their NATO allies who supply them with weapons, helicopters, tanks and aircraft which are used against the peoples of Africa. 17. In our opinion, it is no use deploring or condemning the acts of war directed by Portugal and South Africa against independent African countries. It Is a question of taking practical, effective measures to make it materially impossible for those fascist States to do harm and to commit acts of aggression. The provisions of our Charter prominently mention the sanctions to be imposed on recalcitrants, .recidivIsts and outlaws such as the South African fascists and their Portuguese friends. 18, Africa and world opinion expect the Security Council to shoulder its full responsibilities. There can be no talk of intemationaI peace and security In this body while a colonial war, the dirtiest of wars, is being loosed upon the peaceful peoples of Asia and Africa who are struggling for their freedom and independence. It is no use advocating dialogue of any kind with murderers who have sworn to put an end to the noble struggle of the African peoples. 20. A draft resolution /s/10365/ has been submitted by the Afro-Asian delegations in the Security Council for the Council’s consideration. My delegation shares the legitimate concern of those delegations, and reaffirms that the measures envisaged in that document represent the mini. mum which the peaceful population of Zambia expects of the Council.

I greatly appreciate the friendly, courteous words addressed to me by the representative of Guinea. I am both honoured and touched. 27. It has been clearly stated in the debates in the General Assembly and in the discussion in the Security Council that Persistent provocations and threats by South Africa against the neighbouring independent African States and, in particular, the demonstration of its military power, are in great measure also the result of the conciliatory attitude of some great Powers towards the policy and practices of South Africa. Moreover, that is also the main reason why so far our Organization has not been able to put into effect the numerous resolutions on the liquidation of apartheid and colonial domination in Africa. We are convinced that the lack of readiness on the part of some members of the Security Council more resolutely to commit themselves to the efforts aimed at ending the occupation of Namibia represents encouragement even for the recent acts of aggression against Zambia by South Africa. 22. The next speaker is the representative of Yugoslavia. I invite him to be seated at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, allow me, first of all, to thank you and the other members of the Security Council for affording me this opportunity to participate, without the right to vote, in the deliberations of the Council-upon the instructions of the Yugoslav Government-on the complaint of the Republic of Zambia concerning the provocative and aggressive actions of South Africa. My Government considers the discussion of this problem to be of exceptional importance. 24. At the 1590th meeting of the Security Council, the representative of Zambia, Ambassador Mwaanga, presented strong arguments and convincing evidence of the recent military activities of the Government of South Africa against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of Zambia. The numerous violations of airspace and the crossing by military and police forces of the Pretoria rdgime into Zambian territory seriously threaten the security and independence of that peace-loving country, a Member of the United Nations. The aggressive acts of South Africa against Zambia constitute a flagrant violation of the fundamental norms of international conduct and of the principles of the United Nations Charter. That action is a component part of a campaign and of broader schemes designed to create instability and insecurity in the southern part of Africa and in the entire African continent. 28. Since we are fully aware of the fact that the demonstration of military power and the violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Zambia, as well as the proclaimed policy of South Africa in the southern part of Africa, constitute a threat to international peace and security, it is essential that the Security Council take energetic action against South Africa. 29. It is our considered opinion that the Security Council should, at this stage of developments, most resolutely demand of South Africa that it desist from aggressive and provocative acts against Zambia. Should South Africa fail to comply with that demand, then it will be necessary for the Security Council to undertake, with a sense of urgency,, further measures in conformity with the provisions of the Charter relating to matters of peace and security. It is obvious that peace in Africa cannot be secured so long as there continue to exist coloniaI strongholds, racial discrimination and apartheid on that continent. Given the situation, we are of the opinion that the Security Council as a whole should more resolutely commit itself to resolving those problems, since they are the most direct source of instability on the African continent. 25. The great majority of States Members of the United Nations, among them Yugoslavia, have time and again most resolutely pointed out that the remaining strongholds of colonialism, racial discrimination and the policy of apurtheid constitute a serious source of instability and a perpetual threat to peace and security, not only in southern Africa but also elsewhere in the world. The recent discussion in the Security Council on the aggressive policy of Portuguese coIonialists towards Guinea and Senegal and the actions and military pressures by South Africa against Zambia serve as the best confirmation of such a danger. 30. Relations between Zambia and Yugoslavia are very close and friendly, although those countries are geographically far apart. Their close ties originate not solely from “Yugoslavia most strongly condemns the acts of South Africa and extends full support to the Republic of Zambia and her people in the struggle for preserving their sovereignty and freedom. We consider it necessary for the international community to take the most urgent measures for protecting Zambia and preventing the Pretoria r@ne from continuing its aggressive policy towards Zambia and other peaceloving African countries.” 32. We are confident that this aggressive policy of South Africa towards Zambia will meet with firm resistance not only from African countries but also from all the nonaligned and other peace-loving countries. That is clearly confumed also by the fact that 46 Member States of the United Nations have given their support to Zambia in a letter addressed to the President of the Security Council /S/lO364J. With its consistent policy of commitment to the emancipation of Africa, to the promotion of equitable cooperation and to the advancement of international relations, Zambia has gained great prestige throughout the world. The Third Conference of Heads of State and Government of Non-Aligned Countries was held in Lusaka, the capital city of Zambia, in September 1970. This further confirms the importance and prestige which Zambia enjoys today. In recent years, Lusaka has become a symbol of Peaceful actions and initiatives for the solution of vital problems of the contemporary world. We are confident that the acts of aggression against Zambia by South Africa will meet with condemnation and resolute resistance by Cle entire international community. In that the Security Council should play a decisive role. Indeed, it is bound to do so under the United Nations Charter. 37. The present complaint by Zambia is well founded. Indeed, even the Prime Minister of South Africa was not so categorical a few days ago about the intrusion of South African forces into Zambia on several occasions as was his Foreign Minister when he spoke before the Council on 8 October /1.59&h meeting]. Even when denying the facts, the Foreign Minister did not omit to utter a threat that should the South African authorities decide that any part of South West Africa, which South Africa illegally occupies, should be entered by anyone from the neighbouring countries of Angola, Botswana, Zimbabwe or Zambia, the South African forces would pursue them and take whatever measures might be necessary to teach the bIacks a lesson. South Africa knows, of course, that with a war budget of nearly 3 million dollars and armed forces of all kinds, actual or potential, of nearly ISO,OOCl men, the independent African States on the border of South West Africa would have little chance of defending themselves effectively against that massive military strength. 33, The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish): I call upon the representative of I&a. 38. However, Zambia comes in for special attention for three good reasons, First, Zambia’s opposition to apartheid in all its aspects is total and, we are glad to say, allows no compromise. President Kaunda is a staunch supporter of nonal@unent and a determined opponent of upurtheid. He is therefore a stecial target for the Pretoria racist minority rdgime. Secondly, Zambia stands in the way of the South African policy of working out a system of dividing the African countries by various inducements. That policy implies that if some of the African countries would accept apartheid in South Africa, South West Africa and the Portuguese colonial Territories they could enter ‘into normal relations with those countries with some financial and economic benefit for themselves.

First of all, I wish to offer you, Mr. President, sincerest congratulations on your Presidency of the Security Council for this month. We are certain that this subject and the issues connected with it are so important and will require such sympathetic treatment that tith you in the Chair the Council may hope to make some progress in this matter. 35. i am grateful for this opportunity to express our views on the nature of the complaints that have been brought before the Council with increasing frequency. Today it is Zambia against South Africa. A little while ago it was Senegal against Portugal, and some months ago it was Guinea against Portugal. The time has come, we think, when the Council should take a comprehensive view of these complaints in the perspective of what is happening between the Territories controlled by Portugal, South Africa and Mr. Ian Smith on the one hand, and the independent African countries on the other. 39. Lastly, it is absolutely essential to South Africa that countries like Zambia be effectively undermined to cmatc the soded “third Africa”. The United Nations study on industrialization, foreign capital and forced labour in South Africa points out that it should be clear that what is at stake is the future of a large part of Africa. South Africa’s basic purpose in putting forward its new programme Is to protect itself, But in order to do so it must first undermine 36. It is common ground among all of us that we hate awtheid, that we strongly resent the innumerable humilia- 40. When these complaints come before the Security Council-from Zambia, Senegal, Guinea or anywhere elsethe defence is either that the incidents complained of did not take place or that they were justified. The Security Council has recently investigated some of these denials and found them to be without substance. However, not enough attention has been paid to examining the pretexts. For South Affica, for instance, the justification is that this Territory of South West Africa (Namibia) is under its control. It forgets that whatever control it has in that area is illegally exercised, and that it has no right to be there. That aspect of the matter is already before the Security Council in a different context, and we shall soon have to discuss seriously how South Africa’s illegal control of this Territory can be quickly and effectively terminated. Meanwhile, that is no justification for a State to take aggressive action against a sovereign State from the territory of a third country it is illegally occupying. 45. We should like to make still another suggestion to the Council. These frequent complaints by African States and the effects of South Africa’s policies and actions undertaken with the full cooperation of Lisbon and Salisbury persuade us that the Security Council would do well to keep these problems under periodic review. I know that several organizations of the United Nations system deal with apmtheid, decolonisation and United Nations administration-such as it is-of Namibia. While those efforts continue, to us it seems necessary that peace and security in that area, which is being constantly threatened by South Africa, should be kept under continuous review by the Council. Perhaps once in three months, or as frequently as the Council may decide, the Council could consider this problem in its various aspects, decide what action could be taken to restore the rights of the people both of the colonial areas and of such areas as South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe, and examine in detail, with as much publicity as possible, the effectiveness, or lack of effectiveness, of the economic sanctions and other restrictions the Council may have from time to time decided upon in respect of any territory or any Government. 4 1, The General Assembly has already indicated that so long as the oppression by a minority Government of the majority of the population continues, or so long as the colonial and racist form of domination is not brought to an end, it will be perfectly legitimate for freedom fighters and liberation forces ta continue their struggle by all available means. We believe the time has come when the Security Council can accept those two ideas in a formal decision. The Council can and should accept the legitimacy of the struggle for liberation from colonialism, which is right and lawful and can be waged by all means. It can and shoufd accept that the struggle of peoples to put an end to the oppression of the vast majority of the people of any country by a racist minority regime-as is taking place in various parts of southern Africa-is equally legitimate, and that the oppression should be brought to an end by all possible means. Secondly, it can and should be made clear by the Council, in a formal declaration, that South Africa has no justification whatever for being in South West Africa. 46. We know only too well the inhibitions of various Governments towards taking the forthright action permitted by the Charter in such situations. We believe that if some of the suggestions we have made are followed we shall progress towards the elimination of colonialism and neocolonialism, and also of the oppression by minority regimes of vast majorities. Simultaneously, we shrill then be prepared to remove all those evils, whatever they may be, in all their forms and manifestations, whatever the climes and conditions in which colonialism and neo*olonitdism may prevail. 42. Once we had definitely and clearly stated those legal principles it would be simpler to deal with all the complaints by several independent sovereign States. We are fully aware of the difficulties that will be created in various quarters in defining those legal principles. But at the same time we believe that unless those legal principles are squarely faced and clearly stated this Council and other United Nations bodies will not make much progress. 47. The Council will no doubt take such specific action on the present Zambian complaint as it can, but we do not believe that efforts on specific issues will be fully effective unless we relate them to broader perspectives and ultimate goals, The alternative is to deal with those problems from day to day, and to hope for the best. We cannot build on hope unless it is backed by suitable plans and solid determination. 43. Any action taken to suppress a liberation movement or the movement for equal rights of the people of a country would then be automatically unjustified, and those who Perpetrated it could be treated as aggressors. Similarly, the South African presence in South West Africa would be that of an aggressor, and both the international community and all States individually or collectively would be within their rights in ending that aggression.

I thank the representative of India for the kind words he has addressed to me, which have made me very happy. 49. I call upon the representative of Pakistan. 51, The Pakistan delegation Is grateful to you and to the members of the Security Council for granting its request to participate in this debate without the right to vote. 52. The background to my delegation’s desire to speak in the Council on Zambia’s complaint is Pakistan’s close and anxious concern with the situation in southern Africa, which has been expressed in the Council continuously for many years now. However, two special reasons have prompted my delegation to address the Council on this particular occasion. 53, One Jies in the sympathy and admiration evoked from us by Zambia’s bearing of a burden that should be shouldered really by the entire membership of the United Nations. Along with the Democratic Republic of. the Congo, the People’s Republic of the Congo, the Repubhc of Guinea, tJle Republic of Senegal and the United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia has become the object of continuous threat and pressure from the Pretoria-Salisbury-Lisbon alliance which seeks to perpetuate a racist and colonialist order in southern Africa, The menace which these States have to face, the sacrifices which they have to make and the slrugglc which they have to sustain cannot but command the spontaneous support of all of us who seek to realize the aims of the United Nations Charter. 54, The second reason is that the armed incursions which form the subject of Zambia’s complaint contained in document S/10352 of 6 October and of Ambassador Mwaanga’s statement /159&h meeting] are nothing but aggressive manifestations of South Africa’s illegal occupation of Namibia. As such they underline the threat to international peace and security which is caused by South Africa’s military presence in that Territory of the United Nations, Consequently, they demonstrate the fact that the poJicies pursued by the Pretoria regime constitute not only an outrage but also a serious danger to the sovereignty and territoral integrity of independent African States in that region. 55, It is not necessary for me to dwell upon the facts narrated by Ambassador Mwaanga in his statement. He made it very clear that the incident of 5 October was not an isolated one but the culmination of a series of systematic and premeditated encroachments on Zambia’s airspace and territory committed by the armed forces of South Africa. The fact that, on behalf of his Government, he offered to receive a visiting mission of the Security Council which would verify the complaint, on the sole condition that the mission would also be given uninhibited access to Namibia, demonstrates the genuineness of the complaint as well as the moral integrity of the Zambian Government. 56, fn his reply, the Foreign Minister of South Africa has, of course, denied the truth of Zambia’s complaints [ibid.]. But, as some members of the Council have already remarked, his statement was noteworthy in several respects. 58. Second, in total and inimitable oblivion of the position of the United Nations regarding the Territory of Namibia, Mr. MuIler did not broach the question of what justified even the presence, not to mention the action, of the armed forces of South Africa on the boundary between Zambia and the Caprivi Strip-which is nearly a thousand miles from the border of South Africa, 59. Third, his statement left no doubt whatsoever that violent incidents arc taking place as a result of South Africa’s suppression of those very elements which seek to bring down not the Pretoria regime but its illegal occupation of Namibia, These elements not only represent the forces of freedom: they are fighting in a cause with which the United Nations has totally identified itself. They are therefore combating an adversary of the United Nations. 60. From General Assembly resolution 214.5 (XXI) of 27 October 1966, which ended South Africa’s Mandate over Namibia, to Security CounciJ resolution 283 (1970) which called upon aJJ States to take specific action that would emphasize the illegality of Soutll Africa’s presence in Namibia and assert the authority of the United Nations over that Territory, the Organization is committed to the very cause which is being upheld by those whom Pretoria calls “the terrorists”. If it is the moral duty of the Organjzation to protect them from the repression of South Africa, how much more is it incumbent upon the Organization to give all support to Zambia and the other African States which are being made the objects of punitive action by the Pretoria r&ime? 61. There can be no doubt now about how steadily-for lack of effective action by the Security Council-the situation in southern Africa is deteriorating to the point where it is posing a multiple danger to peace far more widespread than that caused by friction between two States. The intimidating military posture of South Africa and its strategy of pushing its defence line to the north, thus creating a system of buffer States around itself, are clearly illustrated by the building of a major base in the Caprivi Strip, located in Namibia, and by the continuous pressure of mounting raids on the territory of neighbouring African States. 62. My delegation would urge the Security Council to adopt the draft resolution [S/l 036.51 which was introduced by Ambassador Tomeh on behalf of Burundi, Sierra Leone, Somalia and the Syrian Arab Republic at the Council’s 1590th meeting. To our mind, that draft resolution represents the mJnimum action required on this occasion. It is necessary to stress that the magnitude of a particular incursion by South Africa into the territory of Zambia is not an index of the seriousness of the situation that is developing in that region. Each incident is part of a

I am grateful to the representative of Pakistan for his generous references to me. I feel deeply honoured.

I have asked to be allowed to speak on a point of order. If there are no more speakers to be heard I respectfully request, in accordance with rule 33, paragraph 1, of the Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security Council, that the meeting be adjourned for an hour, in view of some consultations that are going on, so as to enable the Council to continue its discussion.

I take it that the proposal made by the representative of Syria is generally acceptable. I think we can adopt it immediately and adjourn for an hour, so that during that time we may have consultations which may prove useful in finalizing our work.

It is already 5.50 pm., and it seems to me that it might be rather late to resume our meeting this evening, in view of possible commitments on the part of the various delegations. In these circumstances, would it not be better simply to adjourn the meeting?

I feel rather embarrassed, because I did not make a formal proposal; I merely made a working sugges-’ tion. I see that the draft resolution has just been distributed to us and personally I am prepared to vote immediately, if that is the general desire. But, if several delegations believe that they should receive instructions from their Governments and have time to think matters over, I am prepared to request an adjournment until tomorrow. In any event I 69. Mr. FARAH (Somalia): I should like to support the proposal made by the representative of the Syrian Arab will concur with the opinion of the Council. Republic. Since the presentation of the draft resolution /S/10365/ at our last meeting, consultations have taken 74. Mr. TOMEH (Syrian Arab Republic): I, for my part, place between members of the African group and delegamade the suggestion only in order to facilitate the work of tions around this table. As a result, certain revisions have the Council, What was uppemlost in my mind was the been made. In fact a modified version of the draft availability of the Ambassadors with whom consultations resolution /S/lO365/Rev.l] is being circulated to delegawould be conducted. If the Ambassadors will be available tions at this moment. It is the hope of the Afro-Asian tomorrow we will gladly agree to adjourn the meeting.

Possibly the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic may agree with the representative of France and, with his consent and that of all other members of the Council, we might adjourn until tomorrow morning, thus leaving more time for the consultations to which he referred, 70. The situation along the Namibian-Zambian border is not an easy one; it is tense. We believe that a resolution adopted at this stage could have some impact upon that situation .

I have the greatest sympathy for the conciliatory words just spoken by the representative of Somalia, but like the representative of France I feel that we need a little more time. So far as my delegation is concerned I must ray that we were not approached for consultations on the draft resolution to begin with, and now we have before us an informal paper with some amendments. 1 hardly think that we are in a position to take a decision this evening. I believe that in these conditions it would be much more sensible to adjourn and meet again, Mr. President, when you felt the time was right for concluding our deliberations. It is now very late. We have been under great pressure, with a very heavy schedule. Most of us have appointments with our Foreign Ministers. I think it would be much more convenient for all of us ifwe could have a little more time for consultations and for reading the new draft carefully. We could then meet again at a more convenient time. I think this would be in accordance with the practice we have followed in the past, and would also be the more constructive approach. 72. Mr, JAMIESON (United Kingdom): I should like briefly to support the proposal of the representatives of France and Italy to adjourn until some time tomorrow, Like the representative of JtaJy, J am very glad that more moderate counsels now seem to have prevailed or to be prevailing. I would only comment that it might perhaps have been better if consultations had taken place before a draft which clearly was likely to be totally unacceptable was submitted. We are glad that there is now the possibility of arriving at a draft which might present fewer difficulties. At the same time I would say that I have only just seen this revised draft resolution and I think I shall have to take instructions as to my delegation’s position on it.

I should like to comment very briefly on the procedure adopted in preparing, and perhaps in submitting, draft resolutions to this Council. Invariably when a matter relates to Africa, the initiative is undertaken by the Afro-Asian group. Invariably the first initiative always meets with a wall of silence. For example, in the case of the working document which my delegation, on behalf of the Afro-Asian group, circulated to the members of the Council five days ago on the question of Namibia, it will be remembered that I appealed to delegations through the President, saying that the Afro-Asian members would be happy to have delegations consult with them on the text of that draft, to enable the work of the Council to go forward. I regret to inform you that, although five days have passed, only one delegation has found it convenient and expedient to contact my delegation. As members of the The meeting rose at 6 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nolions publicolions may be obtained from booksforts and distributors Ihroughou) fht world. Consult your bookslore or writt lo: United Hafions, Soles Section, New York or Gtntvo. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Los publicaliens des Nofions Unies sonf tn ven)t dons 16s libroirits tf Its agtncts dipositoirts du mondt tnlitr. Informer-vous oupr+s de vobt librairis ou odrrssaz-vous 61 Notions Unier, Section dcs vtnlts, New York ou Gtnlivt. HAH IlOflYqHTb HBAAHHfl OPTAHHSAUHM 06bEAHHEHHblX HAL(Hfl COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicocionts de lar Nociones Unidos cs16n tn vtnla en librtrlos y cosos disfribuidoros tn ladas porter dtl mundo. ConsulIt a su librtro o dirijast o: Nacionts Unidos, Stccibn dt Vtnfas, Nutva York o Ginebro. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S. 0.50 (or equivalent in other currencies) fjg13o-August 1973-2,050