S/PV.1597 Security Council

In accordance with previous decisions taken by the Council, and if there is no objection, I shall invite those representatives participating in our debate on this item to take the places reserved for them in the Council chamber. 2. 1 invite the representatives of Sudan, Ethiopia, South Africa, Liberia, Guyana, Chad, Nigeria, Mauritius, Saudi Arabia, Uganda and India to take the places reserved for them in the Council chamber, it being understood that they will be invited to take a seat at the Council table when they wish to speak. I also invite the President of the United Nations Council for Namibia to take a place at the Council table. At the invitation of the president, Mr. E. 0. Ogbu, president of the United Nations Gwncil for Namibia, took a place at the Secun’ty Council table, and Mr. M. Fakhreddine (Sudan), Mr, Y. Tseghe (Ethiopiaj, Mr. C. F. G. von Hirschberg (South Africa), Mr. J, R. Grimes (Liberia), Mr. P. Moussa (Chad), Mr, R. Ramphul (Mauritius), Mr. J. Baroody, (Saudi Arabia), Mr. G. S. K. ibingira (Uganda) and Mr. S. Sen (India), took the places reserved for them in the Council chamber.

I wish to draw the attention of the members of the Council to the text of the revised draft resolution submitted by the delegations of Burundi, Sierra Leone, Somalia and the Syrian Arab Republic, contained in document S/10372/ Rev.1.

At the meeting of thiscouncil held on Friday, 15 October 1395th meetin&‘, my delegation had the privilege of presenting the text of a draft resolution, which was reproduced as a Security Council document under the symbol S/10372. The draft resolution was presented on behalf not only of my delegation but also of the delegations of Burundi, Sierra Leone and Syria. 5. Following the presentation of that draft resolution, we heard a number of constructive suggestions made by the representative of Argentina, and at the end of the meeting my delegation, along with the delegations. of Sierra Leone, Syria and Burundi, indicated that those suggestions would be given very careful consideration and that it was hoped the majority of them would be incorporated in the draft resolution. I am glad to inform the Council that, as a result of consultations, the majority of those suggestions have now found expression in the first, sixth and tenth preambular paragraphs and in operative paragraphs 5 and 14 of the revised version of the draft resolution contained in document S/10372/Rev.l.

With his usual clarity and eloquence, my distinguished friend, Ambassador Farah of Somalia, has now formally submitted the revised draft resolution contained in document S/l0372/Rev.l. May I thank him and the other sponsors, the representatives of Burundi, Sierra Leone and the Syrian Arab Republic, for having been good enough to take into account the suggestions that I made at the 1595th meeting when we referred to the original text of the draft resolution. My intention and my desires were, whenever possibIe, to improve the formal contents of the document before us. In noting that those suggestions have been included, my delegation wishes again to express its gratitude for having its views considered. In fact, most of’ the suggestions that I made have been included in this newly revised text. I should like to state that we are extremely satisfied and can find no objections to the text being proposed to us. Therefore, I wish to state that I am ready to vote in favour of the draft resolution. 7. The Afro-Asian members therefore believe that the provisions of the draft resolution which they have sub. mitted to the Council should be maintained in their present form. The draft resolution is based strictly on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice’ and upon other resolutions which hle had been adopted by the Security Council and by the General Assembly. 13. The representative of Somalia, in his presentation, also said, and this is the fact of the matter, that with regard to what would havz been paragraph 7-to which I also made reference in my last statement-a separate section or separate draft resolution could have been drafted. 8. We, the sponsors, believe that we have a strong, indisputable juridical position and one which should command the widest support amongst the international community. We trust that, with the revised text, it will now be possible to gain unanimous support. 14. Let me clarify matters somewhat on this question. In my last statement, the Council may recall that I said that when the Security Council adopts a resolution on the item on its agenda, regardless of the decision arrived at, we could always leave the door open so that at the same time, and without prejudice to the draft resolution to be adopted, some type pf negotiation could be undertaken that might lead to the ultimate goal that we all desire for Namibia, namely, independence. This willingness to negotiate, I felt, would place South Africa squarely before the responsibility of either accepting or rejecting negotiations. In either case the Council would know precisely where it stood and how to act accordingly. 9. There has been a last-minute change, as will be seen from operative paragraphs S and 6, to reflect the importance which the sponsors attach to the advisory opinion. Operative paragraph S “Takes note with appreciation of the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 21 June 1971”. Operative paragraph 6 goes a step further. It ‘Endorses the Court’s opinion expressed in paragraph 133 of the advisory opinion”. Naturally, the sponsors would have wished to see the Council endorse the whole of the advisory opinion but knowing the positions which indi- 1 Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council resohrtiotl 276 (19701, Advisory Opinion, I. C.J. Reports i971, p. 16. IS. I also said, and I want this to be very clearly understood, that that invitation, which might be embodied IO. With these few introductory remarks, it is the hope of the sponsors that members will have no difficulty in accepting the text of the revised draft resolution and that it will be possible for the Council to proceed to a vote as soon ;1s possible. 11. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish]: I thank the representative of Somalia for his statement. We have taken careful note of what he said, particularly when he mentioned the work done, in a spirit of utmost goodwill, in order to reconcile views on a draft resolution likely to be adopted by the Security Council. He referred specifically to the suggestions made by the representative of Argentina and he termed them constructive, particularly with regard to the revised text presented by Burundi, Sierra Leone, Somalia and the Syrian Arab Republic. 20. The draft resolution before us at this time is based upon a reality, namely, the work done by the Ad Hoc SubXommittee on Namibia; it is also based upon another reality, and that is the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice.

I listened to the statements of Ambassador Farah and Ambassador Ortiz de Rozas with the attention thejl deserved. I would like first of all to congratulate the members of the Council on the spirit of understanding and co-operation they have shown in a matter which is indied most difficult, a problem to which we all very much want to find a solution. For although we may be in disagreement on points of law or on certain methods, we are nevertheless all agreed on the final objective, which is to enable the people of Namibia to exercise their right to self-determination. pass unheeded, the Security Council would not have wasted its time and would certainly not have abdicated any of its responsibilities, because the draft resolution submitted by the four sponsors would still be in force. Thus, on the one hand, WC should be acting on the strength of the report of the Rd HOC Sub-Committee on Namibia, while at the same time WC should be acting on the basis of the views expressed and exchanged during the course of this debate. 22. The representative of Somalia has presented a revised draft resolution /S/ZO372/Rcv.I], in which the sponsors have taken up various suggestions made by the representative of Argentina. On that point, there was nothing unexpected or new for us. On the other hand. there are other changes in the text, changes that in our opinion are not minor ones. For example, in operative paragraph 6 we find the word “Ezdurses “. May I say, parenthetically, that I believe the French translation to be inexact-the original text was in English. The word ‘Endorses” is translated by the words “Fait sierrlze”. As far as I know, “endorse” indicates what one does in signing one’s name on the back of a cheque, for which the French translation is “dormer son aval d . . ‘: You might say that there is no great difference between them, but there is nevertheless a difference between “doarrer SOH aval” and ‘pire sit-me “, and I should therefore like to have the French text reflect the meaning accurately. 16. Since the laudable spirit of compromise shown by the four sponsors 011 draft resolution S/l0372/Rev.l has enabled us to conddcr other possibilities, such as the ones 1 mentioned earlier, I would ask you, Mr. President, and the sponsors of this draft resolution to be good enough to postpone the vote on it, so that, together with the four sponsors and with other members of the Council, particularly those of the Afro-Asian group; who obviously have interests and responsibiIities in the question, consultations may take place on the possibility of preparing the other draft resolution. Then, perhaps at an early date, perhaps even in a few hours, we might agree on a text that would be duly submitted to the Security Council, at which time we might vote on both draft resolutions. 23. This being said, there obviously is a problem; and since we are, 1 believe, a serious delegation that attaches importance to our votes, whether they be in favour, against or abstentions, we feel obliged very seriously to study the various changes, and I must communjcate them to mY Government and receive instructions. 17. But in the meantimc, to gain time perhaps, members of the Council might wish to speak on the present draft resolution already submitted to them for consideration. 18. The PRESIDENT (illtetpretation from Spank: The representative of Argentina was extremely clear and we understood perfectly what he said. Logically, the revised draft resolution denotes a great effort on the Fart of its sponsors and seems to be generally acceptable to the tnembers of the Council. The representative of Argentina argued that it m&M be wise to prepare a new draft resolution that would draw its meaning from operative Daragraph 7 but would in no way contradict or compete ,+rith this draft reso]ution once it becomes an adopted jocument. 24. This is why, as far as my own delegation is concerned, we would not be in a position to vote today on the revised text. Furthermore, the representative of Argentina has pointed out a new possibility which appeals to us, in view of the position we have taken in the debate. There also, however, we would need to have a text. Words are important, they must be weighed, and for that purpose too we need some time. 25. That is why-and contrary to our practice, since the French delegation is not in the habit of delaying or postponing meetings of the Council-we rather tend to g. Obviously we are willing to entertain such a possibility nd tllink it appropriate, and, as the representative of lrgentina has correctly stated, we could take advantage of have listened carefully to the-representative of France who 3 1. was very clear. He quite justifiably feels that he will have to For these reasons, this is not a new matter but rather a carry out some consultations on some of the terms of the correction. This point should have appeared in the previous draft: it is an essential one. revised draft resolution, the general terms of which seem acceptable to him. He referred specifically to operative paragraph 6, which begins with the word “endorses”. He has correctly referred to both the juridical and grammatical difference between “to accept” and “to endorse”. He also referred to the latest suggestion of the representative of Argentina and said that he would like to see those ideas in a specific document in order to engage in the consultations which are necessary between all representatives and their superiors. We understand full well the views of the representatives and their superiors. We understand full well the views of the representative of France, and unless the majority opinion disagrees, we are ready to vote ‘on any document this afternoon. 27. On the other hand we might take advantage of the time between this meeting and the next to consider this revised text carefully, which 1 think will be an easy task, and to take cognizance of the second draft resolution to which the represcntativc of Argentina referred.

,I should like to speak on a specific point, or to bc precise, I want to state that WC should not overlook the merits of the revised text since a very important fact had been omitted in the first text. The members of the Council will recall that since under resolution 284 (1970) the Council referred the question of Namibia to the international Court of Justice, and also since the United Nations, and therefore the Security Council as well, were represented at the Court in the person of the Secretary-General and furthermore since the Members of the United Nations were able to address the Court at The Hague during its hearings on this?natter, the normal and logical conclusion to be drawn from these facts is that the Council, which asked for the advisory opinion from the Court, is in law a party to the case on which the Court has handed down its advisory opinion. 29. This is a very important aspect of the question which may perhaps have escaped the attention of some members of the Council. As I said earlier, the Security Council is a party to the case submitted to the International Court of Justice and therefore it goes without saying that normally all members of the Council should feel bound to accept the advisory opinion which the Council itself had asked of the court. 30. Any contrary view would seem somewhat strange, since the request for the advisory opinion did emanate from this Council. That is why the sponsors of the draft resolution under discussion felt that it was more just and more in keeping with law to correct the error which had slipped into the text and which, fortunately, has now been corrected. That is why all the sponsors are relying on the Council to understand why we had to add the text now appearing in paragraph 6 of the draft resolution, which

The president intends to call a meeting of the Council for tomorrow. In the meantime, a joint effort might be made to find some form of words to express the idea of “Endorses” in operative paragraph 6, as mentioned by the representatives of France and 3urundi, and also toprepare a new draft text, as suggested by the representative of Argentina.

Having listened very carefully to the statements just made by the representatives of France and Burundi, I feel that among the consultations that might take place between now and our next meeting we might also consider the section of paragraph 6 which reads “Endorses the Court’s opinjon”. May I say that I have no objection to the words “Endorses the Court’s opinion as expressed in paragraph 133 of the Advisory Opinion”. However we think that because of various interpretations of “‘nclorses.the Court’s opinion” there may be some other wording that would allow all delegations to support it. WC might also say “Also takes note of the court’s opinion”, or use some other formula that would meet arly scruples or difficulties that might confront other delegations. In the case of the Argentine delegation there is no such difficulty. But since what we are seeking is unanimous approval of a resolution, we might include this question in the COMJ~- tations between the sponsors and other delegations.

The Soviet delegation has studied the text of the resolution submitted today and would be prepared to proceed to a vote, However, a request has been made by several members of the Council, in particular the representatives of Argentina and France, that the vote should be deferred until the next meeting and the Soviet delegation has no objection to that. At the same time, we should like to request the sponsors to inform the Soviet deIegation of the progress of the consultations before the meeting of the Security Council at which we shall proceed to vote. That is the request of the Soviet delegation.

We have taken note of the request of the representative of the Soviet Union and I presume that the sponsors of the draft resolution have done likewise.

First, I should like tomake it clear that the revised draft resolution submitted by the Afro-Asian members must be considered on its own merits and should not be linked to any other draft resolution. In other words, if the draft resolution submitted by the representative of Argentina does not materialize, it does not mean that our draft resolution will not go forward. Our draft resolution is formally before the Council.

The idea of deferring a decision or a vote on this text stems from a desire to attain unanimity, Wecould utilbe the next few hours in consultations on which word is to be used for “Endorse”. It could be “Accept”, or some similar expression. AI1 these views can easily be taken into account in our search for unanimity which I think is what we all want.

Let me say briefly that I entirely share the views of my friend the representative of Somalia as expressed in the opening words of his last statement. I, too, believe that this draft resolution stands alone, I do not believe it has to be merged with or confused with another draft resolution. It has to be considered separately on its merits. ‘Whatever draft resolution may emerge from the consultations that may take place with other members of the Council will be a completely separate draft which must in no way impede this very important and substantive draft resolution and, as I said earlier, one which my delegation supports. The other is a separate procedure that will complement this draft resolution, but is in no way intended to impinge upon this draft resolution. 44. May I with all respect venture to ask our cotteague from Somalia whether he would object to agreeing to the suggestion that the vote on this draft resolution be deferred until tomorrow afternoon at our next meeting when it will be considered on Its merits and independent of any other draft, with the assurance that by tomorrow the wording referred to by the representative of France will have been cleared up.

I am sure 1 am speaking for all the sponsors when I say that we wish to give every delegation here the time necessary to obtain instructions on this revised draft resolution.

1 think that your explanation has satisfied the representative of Somalia, namely, that the revised text will have no link, should I say, will not depend upon the approval of the proposal referred to by the Argentine representative. This draft resolution, as you said, stands alone and therefore is not linked to the other draft resolution, to which the representative of Argentina referred twice in his statement.

1 take it then that we would all agree that we meet again tomorrow afternoon at 3.30 for the following purposes: immediately to vote upon the revised draft resolution, and to take up any other draft resolution that may be submitted on the question of Namibia. 41. Obviously, postponement of a vote will allow condtations on the terms contained in operative paragraph 6 of

May 1 ask whether the Council wishes to vote this afternoon upon the revised text, or as a considerable number of members of the Council seem to feel, should we defer the vote until tomorrow? If we postpone the vote until the next meeting there would be the advantage that unanimity would bc easier to achieve and we would thus also comply with the request of the representative of France who very clearly said that he would appreciate a few hours to carry out specific consultations on operative paragraph 6 of the draft resolution, The representative of Argentina also referred to that specific paragraph. The meeting rose at 5.10 p.m