S/PV.1663 Security Council

The President has also received a letter from the representatives of Guinea, Somalia and the Sudan [S/ZO802J; requesting the Council to extend an invitation in accordance with rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure to Mr. Eshmael Mlambo of Zimbabwe, to address the Council. Provisional agenda (S/Agenda/1663) 1. Adoption of the agenda. 2. Question concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia: Letter dated 20 September 1972 from the representatives of Guinea, Somalia and the Sudan addressed to the I’ President of the Security Council (S/10798). 3. As there are a number of precedents in which the Council has agreed to extend similar invitations under rule 39, I would propose that the Council accede to this request. If I hear no objection I shall take it that the Council extends an invitation under rule 39 to Mr. Mlambo to address the Council at the appropriate time. The meeting was called to order at 4.35 pm It was so decided. Adoption of the agenda

This meeting of the Security Council has been convened in response to the request made by the representatives of Guinea, Somalia and the Sudan, in a letter dated 20 September [S/.ZO798/, that the Council resume consideration of the problem of Southern Rhodesia in pursuance of its decision to remain actively seized of the matter. The agenda was adopted. Question concerning the situation in Southern Rhodesia: Letter dated 20 September 1972 from the representatives of Guinea, Somalia and the Sudqn addressed to the President of the Security Council (S/10798) 5. The first name inscribed on my list of speakers for this afternoon is that of the representative of Morocco, and I now invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

The President of the Security Council has received many letters containing requests from delegations to be allowed to participate in the discussion of the item on the agenda without the right to vote. These requests, in the order in which they were received, are from the delegations of the following countries: Algeria, 25 September; Senegal, 25 September; Morocco, 26 September; Zambia, 26 September; Mauritania, 26 September; Guyana, 26 September; and Kenya, 26 September. In accordance with the practice of the Council and the provisions of the provisional rules of procedure, I suggest that the representatives of the abovementioned countries be invited to participate in our discussion without the right to vote, As there is no objection, I consider that the Council agrees to that suggestion. Because the number of places at the Council table is limited, I shall invite those representatives to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber, on the understanding that when it is their turn to speak they will be invited to take places at the Council table,

Mr. President, first of all may I be allowed to convey to you and to all the members of the Council our thanks for giving us the right to participate in this debate. I do not, Mr. President, wish to miss this opportunity to convey to you my personal congratulations on your presidency of the Security Council which, for more than one reason, has symbolic value, and is reassuring, particularly in our consideration of the problem at present before us in the Council. 7. At the historic Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity held in Rabat in June 1972, the Heads of African States agreed on a proposal by His Majesty King Hassan II, to give absolute priority to the liberation of the African continent and to the complete elimination of colonialism. They agreed to 8. That in fact accounts for today’s debate, as well as the massive participation of African representatives. After considerable progress, the process of decolonization in Africa has come to a standstill. This does not fail to be of major concern to us, and it causes us profound perplexity. It is obvious that colonialism, which at one point was in its death throes, has found new life, due in part to the close co-operation of colonial forces, which are manning their last defences, and thanks aho to the thinly disguised support of a number of foreign Powers which are all too anxious to participate in the economic exploitation of territories still under foreign control. 9. The case of Southern Rhodesia in particular, even more than any other, is especially perplexing even to the most enlightened observers. No other colonial problem has been dealt with in such a strange manner or has meandered through the years into such complex procedures as to be barely comprehensible even to the experts. On the basis of the classical colonial situation an attempt has been made to create a legal monster, tricked out with faits accomplis, accepted with bland acquiescence. There has been unilateral independence, which has been totally alien to 96 per cent of the population; there has been economic sanctions which have been mere optical illusions, and finally there has been the Home-Smith agreement,1 the fruit of tortuous reasoning which ultimately collapsed, as it deserved to, without anyone shedding a tear, not even the authors. 10. What is the situation now? Probably attempts are still being made to construct vain plans to attain the unattainable, to keep the Zimbabwe people indefinitely in their present status as a minority and in slavery. 11. Maintaining Southern Rhodesia under the colonial yoke has become an end in itself, in the sense that the national wealth of the Zimbabwe people will continue to be recklessly plundered, while the local frustrated and subjugated populations continue to grovel itl ignorance and misery. 12. We are also aware of the fact, however, that occupied Southern Rhodesia is an extra chance for survival for Portuguese colonialism in the area and for the racist regime in Pretoria. If Rhodesia continues to be occupied it is a thorn painfully planted in one of the most sensitive areas of our continent, and our independence and sovereignty, acquired at such great cost, can never feel safe from the reckless adventures of neighbouring occupation forces, This has been amply proven in other areas of Africa, and the price which auf brothers have had to pay to survive on other occasions has been high indeed. 13. The Organization of African Unity has made it possible for Africans to become aware of their existence, 1 See official Records of fhe Security Council, &en@srjcth year, SuPPlement for October, November and December 1971, documcntS/10405. 14. Today the Zimbabwe people is the subject of oUI attention. First of all, let us pay tribute to it for iU selflessness, for its courage, and for having for the first t&X courageously met the challenge hurled at it, This l,eo$ deserves our material and moral support, and Africa d surely not shirk its duty. But the United Nations, and especially the Security Council, also has its duty, The illegal rbgime of Ian Smith must be given no chance ta survive, 15. A good many resolutions-I could even say a geld many very fine resolutions-have been adopted here, but, wittingly or unwittingly, there have always been gapin@ shortcomings which have made it possible for Ian Smith to continue to flout the Organization as a whole, In fact,ht and his r&ime are fending very well for themselves aad, judging by the way that we have been combating thtm, they would be wrong to express undue concern, We should take up the problem squarely and without hypocrisy, IYe should establish who it is who is and always has &en responci.. ii: in this Rhodesian drama. 16. At this time, the United Kingdom of Great Britainand Northern Ireland has complete responsibility before history in the present circumstances. Why does this great country, which in other circumstances has demonstrated such wisdom and far-sightedness, allow this problem to deteri@ rate? Why did this country, which has such great meaa, propose such shoddy remedies? If it had merely exerted the pressure of its influence, as it had on a number of occasions in the past, then it could have restored Iegal order and brought about some reason, law and justice to the situation. Why does Great Britain avoid its duty? why does it allow a situation to persist where violence, terror and counter-terrorist methods continue to exist, a situation for which we are still searching for a remedy and about which we have ignored or feigned ignorance of the real causes of the evil? 17. The solution lies in action to be determined by the United Kingdom, which is primarily responsible for the situation, but it lies also in action to be determined by he Security Council, on condition that it is applied tithoul any demonstration of weakness, with, if necessary, m international supervisory body that is effective and @lan(. 18. To our way of thinking, this action should ensure bv all appropriate means, and without any delay, the fle@ssaly conditions for the free expression Of the Will Of the Zimbabwe people, to determine their fate on s $nuiflelY democratic and honest basis, without mY economic Or racial discrimination. 28. It is important to note that since the publication of the Pearce Commission’s report2 the British Government, apart from continuing the sanctions policy, has not taken any concrete measures to respond positively to the dictates of the situation. Instead, thqt Government has merely called for a return to the status quo and said that the people in the colony should now get together to determine the next course of action towards their political future. I should like to reiterate the position of my Government, that it is the responsibility of the British Government., as the Administering Authority, to bring together the leaders of all sections of the people of Zimbabwe. What Zambia would wish to see therefore is the convening of a constitutional conference under the chairmanship of Britain. In this connexion, the African National Council, under the leadership of Bishop Muzorewa, has already called for a representative national convention preparatory to a constitutional conference. 20. The Security Council has all too often shown hesitation the tragic consequences of which, foreseeable and indeed foreseen, have not been long in showing themselves. 21. Too often also, the Security Council has been paralysed, at times against the almost unanimous views of the General Assembly and even of world public opinion, which demanded swift and effective action to restore peace or to eliminate situations which were generating conflicts. 22. We have no alternative today but to hope that this time the Security Council will decide unanimously, without reservations, to come to the assistance of the Zimbabwe people who ultimately are asking only for their right to life and dignity.

The next name on my list of speakers is that of Mr. Mudenda, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Zambia. I invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make his statement. 29. Whereas the Africans in Zimbabwe have responded reasonably to the British Government’s position, the rebel rdgime has instead intensified racial discrimination. There has been indiscriminate detention of innocent people and systematic, ruthless clamping down on African political activity. The sale of African National Council membership cards, donations to the Council and the maintenance of funds by the Council have been banned. It will further be recalled that not very long ago the peace-loving Chief Rekayi Tangwena and his people were forcibly removed from the land which they had occupied since time immemorial, in order to make way for white settlers. The gallant Chief has refused to relinquish his birthright to the land of his forefathers and has moved with his people to the hills to maintain his resistance, In the process, babies, children and disabled old men and women have become the major sufferers. Recently, the rebel regime decreed the establishment of so-called provincial assemblies for Africans in the territory in areas referred to as Matebeleland and Mashonaland. They have also introduced new measures under which all social facilities and amenities shall henceforth be divided and utilized on colour lines. This is clearly an emulation of South Africa’s iniquitous policy of apartheid,

Mr. President, permit me first to express my sincere thanks and appreciation to you, and through you to all members of the Security Council, for affording the Zambian delegation this opportunity to participate in this important debate oti the grave situation obtaining in the British colony of Southern Rhodesia. 25. The nature of the relations between your great and revolutionary country, the People’s Republic of China, and Zambia is too well known to warrant any comment. We are delighted to see you in the President’s chair, the chair which had been denied you for a very long time indeed. For us in Zambia, and the rest of the freedom-loving and progressive community throughput. the world and, indeed, the oppressed people of Zimbabwe, it is a source of inspiration to see you take the Chair of this august Council for the first time during a month when the Council has before it a grave issue of human freedom and dignity with which your Government and the Chinese people are unwaveringly identified. 30. At present, two independent African States share common borders with Southern Rhodesia. To the north of Southern Rhodesia is Zambia, where different races live together in harmony on the basis of human equality and majority rule. On the western side of Southern Rhodesia is Botswana, where, as in Zambia, a non-racial community flourishes and a truly democratic system of government operates. Thus across their borders the racists can see that it is possible for people of differeqt races to live together in harmony. 26. The Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have embodied and enshrined in them the basic values and fundamental ethics and legal norms of humanity. It is to these that enlightened society looks and by which it is guided in its evolution. This, however, is not the case with the illegal racist minority regime in Southern Rhodesia. To them the issues of human freedom and dignity are determined on the basis of a man’s colour. This @me continues to oppress more than 5 million African people. 2 See Rhodesia: Report of the Commission on Rhodesian Opinion under the Chairmanship of the Right Honourable the Lord Pearce, Cmnd. 4964 (London, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, ~972). 27. The people’s will to be free and independent is indomitable, even in the face of brutal intimidation, and it 32. In time, Southern Rhodesia will be surrounded by independent African States which are opposed to any form of racism and minority rule, 33. Against that background it is evident that the illegal minority regime will have to face reality. Change must take place, but it must be change in the right direction. For a long time the African people of Zimbabwe have called for peaceful change. They still do so, but to no avail, It will be recalled that the Lusaka Manifesto on Southern Africa3 made an offer for peaceful change in there, but that offer was rejected by the colonialist and racist minority regimes, thereby making it imperative for the African people to intensify their armed struggle to effect change. In those circumstances, the people who are fighting to achieve self-determination and freedom deserve maximum support from the international community. 34. The developments in Southern Rhodesia constitute a grave threat to peace and security in the region and in Africa as a whole. It is therefore incumbent upon the international community to act now. 35. I therefore wish to reiterate the call I made upon this Council at its meeting in Addis Ababa on 28 January this year [162&/z meeting] to take the following steps, inter alia: first, to call upon the British Government, as the administering Power, to convene immediately a constitutional conference representative of all the people of Zimbabwe to determine the political future of the colony; secondly, to condemn the British Government for the brutal and repressive measures being perpetrated by the illegal racist regime against the people of Zimbabwe for their legitimate refusal to allow the further tightening of the screws of oppression; thirdly, to call upon the British Government to intervene in the colony militarily to reassert its authority; fourthly, to reaffirm its principle of nonrecognition of the rebel regime by Member States; fifthly, to consider-while in the meantime maintaining sanctionsa decision further to tighten and expand the mandatory sanctions against the rebel colony, so as to cover South Africa and Portugal under the full force of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, 36: In the light of the current developments in the colony, I should like further to urge the Council to take additional measures, including the following: to reaffirm the inalienable right of the people of Zimbabwe to self-determination and independence in conformity with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the Charter of the United Nations; to affirm the principle that there should be no independence before majority rule in Southern Rhodesia, as 37. Zambia, along with other peace-loving nations of the world, will continue to make its contribution towards the attainment of freedom and independence in Zimbabwe. The people of Zimbabwe early this year demonstrated their capacity for unity, as well as their determination to be free and independent. My delegation commends the people of Zimbabwe on their efforts. We have no doubt about the achievement of final victory.

I thank the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Zambia for his kind words of good will towards the Government and people of China. 39. The next name on the list of speakers is that of the representative of Mauritania. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

First of all, Mr. President, I should like to express our great satisfaction at seeing you presiding over the Security Council. We also take pleasure in the fact that the Council will now benefit from your valuabIe and irreplaceable contribution-a contribution which it has always lacked. I also wish to thank you and all the other members of the Council for granting our request to participate in this debate on a problem which my countty considers to be not only among the most important but also among the most serious confronting the international community. 41. This is not the first time that the Security Council has met to debate the tragic situation in Southern Rhodesia. If the people of Zimbabwe are today still deprived of their sacred, inalienable rights to self-determination and indepen. dence it is because the Administering Authority, the United Kingdom, has never wished to take effective measures to put an end to the illegal and racist regime of Ian Smith in spite of the relevant and imperative resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. 42. By failing to agree to cope effectively with its responsibilities in Rhodesia, the London Government has displayed its lack of interest in the barbarous and criminai oppression perpetrated inhumanly and without scmple against the African majority by the white minority; in the inalienable right of the people of Zimbabwe to selfi determination and independence; and in resolution 288 (1970) in which the Security Council called upon the 43, The over-cautious, not to say conniving, attitude of the British Government is all the more inexplicable since it is now clear that the African people of Rhodesia have totally rejected the so-called settlement proposals agreed upon some time ago by London and the illegal @me of Ian Smith, and that the people of Zimbabwe have now reached a high level of political consciousness and deterrnination in the defence of their inalienable rights. 51. It was with that in mind that the three African members of the Security Council asked for this meeting. 52. Free Africa not only approves but is deeply gratified by the relevant resolutions-particularly Security Council resolutions 253 (1968) and 277 (1970) concerning the particular problem of Rhodesia, which the Council is again considering, 44. Mauritania, which has always championed and continues to champion with faith and determination the right of the people of Africa to self-determination and a dignified and independent life, would like to reaffirm once again that any attempt to bargain away the future of the people of Zimbabwe with the Ian Smith regime on the basis of independence before majority rule would be in contradiction of the inalienable rights of the people of that Territory and contrary to the provisions of the Charter and General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV). In other words, my country is proclaiming loudly here that the independence of Rhodesia cannot be conceived of until majority rule exists in that country. 53. Today more than ever independent Africa considers that political, diplomatic, economic and other sanctions as defined in Security Council resolution 253 (196 8) constitute one of the most effective measures for putting an end to the illegal regime in Rhodesia-on condition, however, that those sanctions are applied strictly by Member States, 54. Everyone agrees that, unfortunately, several Member States, including the greatest and the most economically strong, have disregarded the commitments they have undertaken unreservedly and continue, as in the past, to maintain economic, trade and other relations with the illegal and racist regime in Salisbury. The failure of these countries to respect the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council, their collusion with the Ian Smith regime and their unavowed but fierce hostility to the people of Zimbabwe, to Africa as a whole and to the United Nations have done a great deal to strengthen the Ian Smith Government and to maintain the illegal rdgime of the white minority in Rhodesia. 45. We denounce in the firmest possible manner the manoeuvres of the British Government towards negotiating once again with the illegal and racist rdgime of Ian Smith by associating with it a number of collaborators and in particular traditional chiefs and other so-called notables. 46. These attempts, like the previous ones and others which may follow, are inevitably doomed to failure because any serious negotiations leading to a just and final solution of the Bhodesian problem will have to be conducted by the true representatives of the Zimbabwk people. 55. The Security Council must reaffirm energetically the inalienable rights of the people of Southern Rhodesia to freedom and independence and the legitimacy of the arduous struggle which it is waging both within and outside its country for the full exercise of those rights. 47. Until this basic principle is accepted without any ulterior motives the British Government should not hope to solve the Rhodesian problem. Is it necessary to remind people that the United Kingdom, as the administering Power, is obliged to put an end to the illegal &ime in Rhodesia and to prepare for the country’s accession to independence under a democratic system of government in conformity with the aspirations of the majority of the people? 56. The Security Council should draw up a list of all States which continue to maintain economic and other relations with Southern Rhodesia and call upon them to put an end to these relations at once. 57. All States which continue flagrantly and persistently to violate the provisions of Security Council resolutions 253 (1968) and 277 (1970) should be condemned. Special measures should be taken, against Portugal and South Africa because of their geographical situation with respect to Southern Rhodesia and their persistent, stubborn refusal to comply with sanctions against the illegal Salisbury r@ne. Within this context we feel that it is of the highest importance for the Security Council to establish an appropriate system of controlling effectively the application of sanctions against Southern Rhodesia. For that 48. In order to do this the London Government, in our view, should convene as soon as possible a national constitutional conference with genuine representation of the Zimbabwe people, at which the future of the Territory can be decided and a settlement worked out which should then be submitted to the people under a democratic procedure. 49. For this consultation to be effective it is necessary for some preconditions to be met. In particular we have in mind the liberation of all political prisoners and persons 58, As we have just seen, the situation in Southern Rhodesia remains extremely serious. The policy of sanctions has failed in its objective of overthrowing the illegal racist regime of Ian Smith. The racist authorities of Salisbury are today more than ever determined to pursue implacably their racist policy of genocide against the African patriots, and particularly against the leaders of the liberation movement of Zimbabwe. 59. In spite of the gravity of the situation, which is continuing dangerously, we still dc not want to despair of seeing reason and realism triumph in the end. That is why we repeat our appeal to all members of the Security Council, particulary the permanent members, to take the necessary measures to cope effectively with the disturbing situation in Southern Rhodesia. 60. Our appeals go also to the United Kingdom. We request once again that, as administering Power, it commit itself officially and definitively to compliance with ‘its obligations towards the people of Zimbabwe. In so doing it will demonstrate its attachment to the principles of the Charter and its respect for the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. At the same time it will spare the people of Rhodesia as a whole further suffering and will bring about more speedily a result that is inevitable in any event; that is, the independence of the country and the coming ‘to power of a government chosen by the majority of the people of Rhodesia. Any other attitude would only serve further to aggravate the armed struggle of the people of Zimbabwe for liberation, a struggle which it will pursue until final victory, whatever the obstacles in the path of its freedom. 61. In its invincible struggle against oppression and injustice the people of Zimbabwe is not alone. Africa, all of Africa, and all peaceand freedom-loving countries, all progressive people in the world are firmly behind it and will do everything in their power to make it possible for that people to rid itself of racial discrimination and domination.

The next speaker whose name in inscribed on my list is the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Guyana. I therefore invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, may I, first of all, express my thanks to you and to the members of the Security Council for affording me the opportunity to participate in this debate of the Council on the question of Southern Rhodesia. 64. My appreciation, Mr. President, is heightened by your occupancy of the Chair at this moment. When last I addressed this Council almost a year ago, during the debate on Namibia, the People’s Republic of China had not yet resumed its rightful place as a Member of this Organization 65. In seeking and accepting the opportunity to take part in this debate I am conscious of the fact that there are many others, both among the membership of the Council and from outside that membership, better qualified, on the basis of geography and of a more direct and intimate relationship with the situation in Southern Rhodesia, to contribute to these proceedings. That I do so at all is an indication of the deep concern of my Government over the questions of principle involved and the realities of human degradation implicit in the present situation. 66. The cause of self-determination of the people cf Zimbabwe is not the concern of the States of Central and Southern Africa alone; nor indeed is it a cause for Africa alone. The suppression of the right of the people of Zimbabwe to self-determination, the violation of their democratic right of majority rule, the negation of their fundamental civil and political rights no less than their social, cultural and economic rights-and all this at the ham% of a usurped and illegal power wielded by a racist minority regime-create conditions in our human society that should be the concern of all States and of all people, 67. My Government considers it its duty to take a stand on the questions of principle here involved, to call attention to the human needs that are in peril, and in every way open to us to give our support to the independent States of Africa which carry the main burden of the continuing struggle for freedom and justice in southern Africa and which bear the brunt of the international effort for keeping alive the issues that are at stake. 68. Those who have preceded me in this debate have dealt fully and adequately with the history of these sordid developments. There is no need, and I have no wish, to recount it again. Adopting that account and that analysis, which are for the greater part uncontroverted, we see that the situation as it now exists is clearly one over which the international community can no longer be complacent. The cloak of respectability, which negotiations with successive British Governments were gradually fashioning for the Smith r&me, is now a thing of shreds and patches-rent apart by the people of Zimbabwe in the single, limited opportunity of self-expression allowed them on the issue of their fate. Can there be any question today aa to who are the true representatives of the people of this troubled land, or who are not? Can there be any doubt as to what should be done to make a reality of acknowledged right? 69. Southern Rhodesia is a dependency of the United Kingdom. It is the clear duty of the Government of the United Kingdom to reinstate the rule of law in its ColouY and, having done so, to take all necessary measures tc ensure the transfer of power to the people of Zimbabwe in accordance with the principles of the Charter and the directives of the United Nations. That is the fundamental character of the situation and remains the fundamental 70. At a time when the world is surfeited with political violence and with racial tensions arising out of the frustration and denial of legitimate rights and aspirations, let no one have illusions that further increments can be avoided while we adopt resolutions here in New York but continue to make an accommodation with injustice through policies of inaction and temporizing in relation to the illegal regime in Rhodesia. 71. Is it any wonder that Governments the world over outside the African continent, and international organizations devoted to the cause of human dignity and justice, have joined with the Governments and people of free Africa in giving unapologetic support to the liberation movements that are engaged in the struggle against oppression in Southern Rhodesia? The call that went out from Rabat at the ninth annual meeting in June of the Organization of African Unity, representing 41 African States, for material assistance to the liberation movements struggling against colonialism and apartheid in Africa was echoed in August, several thousand miles from Africa, in my own capital at the Conference of Foreign Ministers of Non-Aligned Countries representing 59 States. One half of the Member States of this Organization are now directly involved in this confrontation with oppression. 75. In this context I bring to the notice of the Council the resolution on Zimbabwe that was passed by the Conference of Foreign Ministers of Non-Aligned Countries within the last few weeks-a conference at which, I am glad to say, the African National Council of Zimbabwe was represented by Mr. Mlambo. I have requested that the text of that resolution be circulated as an official document of the Security Council [S/l OSOO] in connexion with this debate& But it is right perhaps that in this intervention I should inform the Council that so great was the concern of the Foreign Ministers over the systematic and increasingly defiant violation of sanctions by Member States that the Conference issued a call to the United Nations to ensure that the evasion of sanctions by international profiteers and speculators is brought to a halt; and more particularly a call upon member States of the non-aligned movement to keep under surveillance all vessels carrying goods prohibited from, or destined for, Southern Rhodesia entering or departing from both Beira and Lourenpo Marques. 72. In the end, the victory of the liberation movements is assured-assured because their cause is just; assured because they struggle on behalf of the overwhelming majority of the people of Zimbabwe; assured because they have the support of an ever-increasing majority of the world’s people. But there may still be time to reverse this commitment to a violent solution. We join with the Committee of Twenty- Four4 in the call it makes in its draft report coveting its work during 1972 upon the British Government to take all effective measures to bring down the illegal regime, to effect immediately the unconditional release of all political prisoners, detainees and restrictees in Southern Rhodesia and to convene a constitutional conference of all leaders and national liberation movements representing the people of Zimbabwe in order to ensure the transfer of all powers to the people on the basis of universal suffrage and majority rule. 76. To move to even more specific recommendations in amplification of this call by the Foreign Ministers, my Government welcomes and lends its support to the concrete proposals that were put forward on the opening day of the general debate at the twenty-seventh session of the Assembly by the Foreign Minister of Kenya, Mr. Mungai.5 If these practical measures could be adopted as a composite programme for self-determination in Southern Rhodesia, there would be hope indeed for its achievement. The essential point is that this Council must go further in the exercise of the a,uthority entrusted to it by the Charter if it is to secure in Southern Rhodesia the goals and objectives to which its more limited efforts have been directed. 77. If we are not to make a mockery of our protestations for a reversal of developments in Southern Rhodesia, if we are to avoid the charge of hypocrisy in our resolutions of protestation, of exhortation and of commitment, all Member States must be prepared to make effective this modest international effort of collective sanctions. We must be ready to widen the sanctions already imposed. We must be ready, as the Committee of Twenty-Fourhas recommended, to enlarge the area of sanctions to include South Africa and Portugal, who flagrantly refuse to carry out the mandatory decisions of this Council, We must be ready, of course, to 73. Yet if the British Government has a primary responsibility in this regard, the international community bears a major responsibility also. Hitherto, this Organization and this Council have, in the area of practical action, placed reliance on economic sanctions to achieve a reversal of the course of events in Southern Rhodesia. Mandatory sanctions imposed by this Council on the illegal regime are capable of influencing events in Southern Rhodesia. However, their capability depends on their effectiveness and 4 Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. 78. Each breach we make, or connive at, or acquiesce in, or clandestinely contrive in the barricade of sanctions is a point of victory we concede to the forces of oppression and racial intolerance, and a point of defeat for collective international action. There is still time for these breaches to be repaired and for the barricades to be strengthened by the resolve of all States that subscribe to the Charter of this Organization and by those non-Members who espouse its principles. 79. Let this debate and the resolutions of the Council emerging from it mark the beginning of such a process, and let it through these beginnings give reassurance to the people of Zimbabwe that the long night through which they are passing will shortly end, and that men and women the world over, nations great and small, keep watch with them through these hours of darkness and work and wait to welcome them, with the dawn, into the community of free States.

I thank the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Guyana for the friendship and goodwill expressed in his statement towards the Government and people of China. 81. The next name on the list of speakers is that of the representative of Algeria. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, by allowing us to participate today in the Council’s debate on the question of Southern Rhodesia, you have given us the opportunity to discharge the mission entrusted by the Organization of African Unity to Algeria, Senegal and Zambia, namely to defend the African case on the problem of Zimbabwe before international bodies. You thus grant us an opportunity of making our contribution to the efforts of the Security Council in its search for a satisfactory solution to this problem, with which it has been faced since 1965, that is to say for seven years. 83. I should not, however, wish to start on the substance of the matter without expressing to you, Mr. President, the satisfaction of the Algerian delegation at seeing today the representative of the People’s Republic of China occupying the seat of President of the Security Council. In the already long but, regrettably, disappointing history of the United Nations, the restoration to the People’s Republic of China of its full rights as a Member of the United Nations and a permanent member of the Security Council constitutes one of the rare reasons for us to feel satisfaction-and not only us but all those who still wish to place their hopes in an Organization which has finally opened its eyes to the realities of the world of today and is determined to assume its proper responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations. 84. The fact that the problem of Rhodesia, the problem of the African people of Zimbabwe is today under debate in 86. That condemnation is justified by the fact that the r@me that seized control of the government of the country is a racist regime that places under the domination of a minority of white settlers an African population five times as great, subjecting it meanwhile to its exploitation. 87. The first repressive measures against African political parties and their leaders were a demonstration of the undisguised intention of the white minority to keep fie African population under its heel, to consolidate its privileges and make permanent its grip on the whole country. It is to the credit of international public opinion and to the credit of the Security Council that they immediately reacted by condemning the establishment of a racist r&ime in Rhodesia and recommending non. recognition of that rkgime. 88. Great Britain, directly involved because of its responsi. bilities as the administering Power, associated itself with the general condemnation and gave an assurance that it would take the necessary measures to restore the situation and lead Rhodesia toward independence with full respect given to the rights of the Africans. The feelings and the anger among the African countries, which were easy to under. stand, were justified by the immediate dangers to them arising from the emergence of a new racist r+ime in southern Africa, now adding its strength to that of Pretoria and threatening to make of all that part of their continent a bastion of .apartheid 89. The unanimity thus shown in the condemnation of the unilateral declaration of independence by Rhodesia, and the determination which marked the attitude of the British Government, might have given grounds for hoping that the rebellion would be rapidly snuffed out. But now, seven years afterwards, we find ourselves once again faced with the same situation, or rathe; with a situation that is even worse, since in the meantime the racist regime of Salisbury has become consolidated and has acquired h Constitution and institutions, which entrench the white minority in their privileges, and finally has broken the last ties binding it to Great Britain by proclaiming itself a Republic, 90. The problem, of course, deserves serious thought before any resolution is adopted that comes as a mere addition to those already adopted which have led to such meagre results. We should dwell on this matter and look facts clearly in the face, for it is by fearing to see things as they really are and dodging the obligations flowing from those facts that we condemn ourselves not only to failure, but also to being faced with a problem even more difficult 91. Every time a discussion has begun on the question of Rhodesia Great Britain has claimed responsibility for action to be taken to achieve the very clearly defined objectivesobjectives upon which there has never been any difference of opinion in the Security Council or in any of the other international agencies. Great Britain has always proved to be very jealous of its prerogatives as administering Power and has not even hesitated to apply the veto when a decision of the Council seemed to it to be prejudicial to those prerogatives. 92. Now, if we really want to recognize the position of Great Britain for what it is-and I do not think anyone has ever challenged it-we believe that it creates not only rights for the administering Power but also duties and obligations, firstly, with regard to those administered, that is to say the African people of Rhodesia, and also towards the Security Council, to which it is accountable for the way in whichit discharges these obligations. On the basis of this situation the Security Council, rejecting all other opinions, has always given its total support to measures advocated by the British Government. These measures included economic sanctions against the Salisbury regime which, according to the estimates and predictions of British leaders, were designed, in the final analysis, to make it possible to achieve our objectives. I will not be so cruel as to remind the Council of the deadlines which at that time were laid down by British leaders for achieving total success. Suffice it to note, with the greatest possible regret and bitterness, that the policy to which we were committed by Great Britain did not live up to the expectations which were created at the time. 95. Negotiating with the rebels is not only recognizing their rebellion and admitting it; it is also a clear indication of a readiness to accept, at least in part, their demands and to end up with a compromise that would leg&e at least some of the advantages which they had seized. Such a method could, in any case, not possibly achieve the objectives we have set ourselves and which the British Government claims it is still pursuing. We have already said this at the appropriate time, and if we repeat it again it is to demonstrate that in this case too there has been an attempt to close one’s eyes to reality. 96. But Great Britain’s efforts did not stop there. At the end of 1971 the British Government attempted a carefully thought out operation, an operation executed with the greatest care, to try finally to achieve a solution of the Rhodesian problem. An agreement was negotiated at great length with the so-called Government of Salisbury. That agreement, including extremely complex measures, was meant, in the final analysis-at least in the view of British leaders-to permit, by a system of carefully contrived stages, the granting gradually to the African majority of an increasing measure of participation in the administration of the country; to achieve-within an indefinite length of time, unfortunately-a true majority Government. 93. The Rhodesian regime was perhaps affected by the hindrances created to its economic development; but it is still on its feet and does not seem to be on the point of collapse, as was predicted. This is already a fact that we cannot conceal from ourselves. It is perhaps unfair to ascribe this to the sanctions policy itself. Perhaps if this policy had been honestly and sincerely applied it could have yielded the hoped-for results; but it was not-because countries like Portugal and South Africa played the role of accomplices of the illegal Rhodesian r&me. There is nothing in that to surprise us, because after all those are two States Members of the United Nations which are already acting as outlaws and have already dealt more than one blow to international law and decisions of the United Nations. But economic sanctions were also infringed by the United States, which since last year has resumed its imports of chrome from Rhodesia, 97. We will not go back into the details of incredible subtlety which were included in that agreement nor to the criticisms that we have already uttered. The representative of Great Britain replied to those criticisms by inviting us to await the results of the Pearce Commission, which was given the task by the British Government of undertaking what was called the test of acceptability of the agreement. The result is something with which we are all familiar now: 94, So the question we should be asking is no longer whether or not the sanctions policy is a good one; but 98. For our part, this attitude on the part of the Africans is not at all surprising. It is entirely in keeping, in any case, with what we had predicted long before the Pearce Commission undertook its consultations. Nevertheless, we must pay a tribute to the members of that Commission for the way in which they conducted their investigations, for the courage they showed in the execution of their mission and for the honesty with which they drew their conclusions. The report of that Commission marks the failure of this last attempt of the British Government, so once again we find ourselves faced by the same problem, with no other prospect but that of beginning a whole new collection of resolutions-ineffective resolutions-and abortive attempts. 99, It is to this situation that I have just called the Security Council’s attention, because it is clear that we cannot indefinitely pursue efforts along the channels which have been chosen up to now when they offer no prospect of concrete results, and when we are dealing with a people on which every day that passes inflicts its toll of misery and suffering, r 100. Why has the illegal Salisbury regime, condemned by Great Britain and by the international community, succeeded in maintaining its domination over Rhodesia and in resisting all the measures taken by the British Government and by the entire membership of the United Nations? We think that this should primarily be put down to the weakness of international institutions which have not managed to have their decisions complied with or carried out. That weakness is itself caused-and there is no reason not to say so-by the betrayal of certain members of those institutions, and by no means the least important, who break the rules of the game and who, while bearing the highest responsibilities for the formulation and application of international law, act in a way contrary to their own decisions. Portugal, South Africa and the Salisbury authorities cannot resist the rest of the world without the support and complicity of other countries which, after having joined in condemning them in international bodies, actually provide them with military, material and financial support, which permits them to continue to defy the rest of mankind with impunity. 101. Such a situation of course involves interests which various parties are not willing to abandon and for which they prefer to sacrifice principles that they none the less proclaim very loudly on other occasions. We would not be SO naive as to overlook the vast possibilities and resources available to business circles to influence the policies of their Governments and to ensure protection of their profits. 102. But this is not enough to explain entirely the relative moderation of certain countries, including Great Britain, towards the racist r@rne of Rhodesia. At the risk of 103. The African States unsuccessfully called for forceful action, because they were convinced that this was the only way of rapidly restoring the situation. We do not want to go into the reasons for the constant refusal to accede to that request for the use of force, whereas in other circumstances, where it would not jeopardize the fate of a white community, force has always been the Brst means to be used, without hesitation and without any accommods. tion. The world is what it is, and we are responsible and realistic enough to accept it as it is, without, however, being misled by false arguments which will never succeed in entirely disguising this sad truth. We must therefore contemplate other methods if we want to succeed in resolving this situation, whose danger to peace and security in Africa, and hence to international peace and security, we are all aware of. 104. It is probably surprising to no one that African States are showing such a great interest in the problem of Rhodesia and such a determination to achieve a settlement, If the responsibilities of the leaders of Great Britain, as administering Power, have always been recognized, it must be equally clear to everyone that it is first and foremost Africans who feel the threat to them of the perpetuation of the situation created by the Rhodesian rebellion, Our natural solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe is not the only thing which motivates our concern; for our own future, the future of our continent, is threatened by the presence of I racist regime in Rhodesia. Up to now the Security Council has followed the recommendations of Great Britain. It has thrown all its authority behind them; it has accepted and encouraged all the initiatives coming from London and persisted in this attitude for seven years. But we must realize that this has been entirely useless and the results achieved have been cruelly disappointing. The African proposals, which have been listened to with perhaps sympathetic attention, have been rejected every time the British Government considered them contrary to its own intentions or as likely to exercise a constraining influence on its policy. 105. We must break this deadlock, a deadlock which has condemned us to constant impotence. The solution, as we have seen, cannot be found through negotiations with the rebel regime of Rhodesia because such a solution, if it is to meet the wishes of the international community and the Security Council, must necessarily call into question the position of domination of the white minority and abolish the privileges it has seized, and, by recognizing the legitimate rights of the African people of Zimbabwe, chart a path which would surely lead to a majority government in a period of time acceptable to the Rhodesian Africans themselves. 106. Similarly, the application of such a solution cannot be entrusted to the illegal authorities who at present hold 113. The time has come to act and to act with resolution, because too much time has already been lost in tentative, hesitant and unrealistic decisions. Seven years is a lifetime for a people condemned to live under racist oppression, in despair and in deprivation. The Security Council can and must adopt a course of action in keeping with principles which it has more than once affirmed. We ask the Security Council to agree to the proposals we are putting forward today on behalf of the whole of Africa and to persuade Great Britain to provide unrestrictedly its support for the implementation of these proposals. By taking a unanimous attitude on this, the Security Council would be responding to the confidence which African countries have always reposed in this international community and would be giving the people of Zimbabwe grounds for hope that its tragic situation will not last forever. 108. It is on the basis of these considerations that the countries of Africa, within the framework of the Organization of African Unity, have urged Great Britain to convene a constitutional conference, bringing together representatives of all sectors of the population of Rhodesia, with the task of preparing with regard to the future of the territory a settlement which would then be submitted to Rhodesians for their approval in accordance with democratic procedure. 109. In our view this is the only reasonable method of breaking the present deadlock in the Rhodesian question and which offers the best prospects of reaching a solution acceptable to the people of Zimbabwe. It is a solution which would leave it up to the interested parties themselves to choose and to determine freely their own future and to agree on the transitional measures which they would have to take to break out of the present situation and to make gradual progress towards the building of an independent Rhodesia in which each citizen would fully exercise and enjoy his rights and liberties.

I thank the representative of Algeria for the friendly and kind sentiments which he expressed in his statement towards the Government and people of China. 115. The last name inscribed on my list of speakers is that of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Senegal, I invite him to take a seat at the Council table and to make his statement. 116. Mr. DIOUF (Senegal) (interpretation from Frenchj: Mr. President, may I thank you, and through you all the members of the Security Council, for being kind enough to allow me to participate in this debate on the problem of Zimbabwe. 110. Great Britain, as the administering Power, after. having met the conditions for such a conference and having contributed to its success, could then guarantee the application of the settlement which would be adopted and continue to assume its responsibilities until the settlement was finally implemented. 117. My delegation is pleased to see at this time as President of the Security Council the representative of a country which has never failed to support the efforts of African countries in their struggle to defend their freedom and safeguard their human dignity. My delegation is particularly pleased to be here because my Government is one of the three countries which the Organization of African Unity asked to defend the legitimate interests of the martyred people of Zimbabwe. 111. The international community, and the Security Council in particular, should give all necessary assistance to encourage and facilitate such a procedure. First, the principle that the independence of Rhodesia could only be recognized after the role of the majority had been respected is a principle that should be strictly adhered to. Secondly, economic sanctions against the Salisbury regime would continue to be applied until agreement emerged from the constitutional conference and had begun to be put into effect. Thirdly, until the conference actually meets, African political parties and Rhodesian liberation movements should enjoy the support and encouragement of international organizations which have recognized the legitimacy of their struggle and which should grant them all possible assistance. 118. In order better to understand the problem of Rhodesia and to place it in its proper perspective, it might be of some interest to mention the main events which led to what can only be called today the tragedy of Zimbabwe. 119. In 1964, when he had only just succeeded Sir Winston Field as Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia, Ian Smith-known for his racist views-resolutely involved the colony in a process which led to the form of independence which has been denounced today by the international community. 112. These are the proposals which the African countries are puttiflg before the Security Council today. We would like to hope that they will be given the attention they merit because these are suggestions which have been carefully 121. Understandably enough the Organization for African Unity has never entirely trusted the British Government, even when later on it proposed economic sanctions against the racist regime. 122. That is why, well before the unilateral declaration of independence in November 1965, the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity meeting in Cairo adopted the important resolution AHG/Res. 8.1 of 21 July 1964, in which it asked, interulia, that Africans should oppose the independence of Rhodesia under the white minority government, and requested the Foreign Ministers of Algeria, Zambia and Senegal to submit the problem to the Security Council. 123. The Heads of African States, on 25 October 1965 in Accra-two weeks before the unilateral declaration of independence-adopted resolution AHG/Res. 2S/Rev.l(l.l) defining the position of the African States. This was that Great Britain should take all necessary steps, including the use of force, to take over control and administration of the Territory; that in the event of refusal, all relations of African States with Great Britain should be reconsidered; and that Africans would use all possilole means, including the use of force, to oppose the unilateral declaration of independence. 124. Unfortunately, there was a rush of events after 11 November 1965, all of which served only to consolidate Ian Smith’s regime, notwithstanding Security Council resolution 217 (1965) adopted on 20 November 1965. 125. What has primarily been responsible for the strengthening of the illegal minority government in racist Southern Rhodesia has unquestionably been the public refusal of the British authorities to use force to put down the rebellion. They have proposed instead the use of economic sanctions to make Salisbury see the light. Thus it was that in 1968 the British navy prevented a Greek tanker from unloading in Beira its cargo, which was being shipped to Rhodesia. In December 1966 there were talks between Smith and Wilson on board the Tiger, which ended in failure. On 29 May 1968 the Security Council adopted resolution 253 (1968) placing an embargo on Rhodesian imports and exports. 126. In September of the same year the Council of Ministers of the Organization of African Unity, in Algiers, adopted resolution CM/Res. 1.53 (XI), calling on all States to implement unreservedly the provisions of Security Council resolution 253 (1968). 127. In October there were further talks between Smith and Wilson, and a further failure; and in May 1969 Smith took one further step in the direction of lawlessness by holding a referendum to adopJ a constitution of the 129. However, in November 1969 the Rhodesian Psrlia. ment gave its approval to the declaration of a republic, to be announced in January 1970, thereby breaking the final juridical and constitutional link of the former colony with the United Kingdom. 130. On 2 March 1970 thy Council of Ministers of the Crganization of African Unity adopted in Addis Ababa resolution CM/Res. 207 (XIV) which declared as illegal any form of government which was not based on the principle of majority rule and placed responsibility for the situation on the imperialist Powers aiding the Salisbury regime, particularly Great Britain, which had not wished to use force to put down the rebellion, and condemned any recognition of the rebel regime as hostile to Africa, 13 1. On 17 November 1970 the Security Council adopted resolution 288 (1970) which reaffirmed the principles contained in earlier resolutions and called upon the United Kingdom, as the administering Power in the 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 selfdetermination. 132. However, with the arrival of the Conservatives in power in Great Britain, and thanks to the complicity of certain developed countries which maintained commercial ties with the rebels, the Smith regime has managed to cape with the consequences of economic sanctions without undue hardship. 133. You will doubtless have noticed, Mr. President, that while last year it voted for the continuation of economic sanctions, curiously enough London entered into talks with Salisbury which led to the “AngloRhodesian agreement”. 134. In reality, the members of the Security Council are not mistaken. When the text was submitted in November 1971, the constitutional electoral administrative provisions of a very subtle kind which are contained in the agreement were designed only to perpetuate by de jure recognition the unilateral declaration of independence and the domination of the Southern Rhodesian racist minority. In spite, then, of the expressed reservations by the Council against the British initiative, the Pearce Commission sounded out the African population on the subject of the acceptability of the agreement, and it went to Rhodesia to do so. We are all very familiar with what happened next. There were riots in a number of centres in Rhodesia. There was intimidation, shooting and massive arrests-all of which, of course, did not prevent the African people from unambiguously reject. ing the provisions contained in the agreement. 135. Is there any need to add that in the course of the unprecedented session of the Security Council in Addis 139. In the opinion of my delegation, economic or other forms of sanctions will not be able to accomplish very much against Ian Smith and his clique. It is more than a matter of urgency for the administering Power to use the most vigorous means to discourage the usurpers in Salisbury. But will the United Kingdom do that? May I be allowed to say that I doubt it very much. 140. One can only conclude that it is for the Security Council, and particularly for the major Powers, to restore the dignity of the people-more precisely, of the entire continent, which is anxiously though hopefully awaiting the verdict of the Council. 137. In the face of this further escalation on the part of the illegal and racist regime, we cannot fail to mention once again the African position, set forth so clearly in resolutions CM/Res. 258 and CM/Res. 267 adopted by the Council of Ministers of the Organization of African Unity in Addis Ababa in February and in Rabat in June 1972. 141. The Council is clearly possessed of the means to ensure compliance with its decisions, and we believe, then, that it should decide to use the resources available under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. 138. Generally speaking, that position may be summed up as follows: the independence of Rhodesia cannot be agreed upon without respect for majority rule; it follows that independence must be agreed upon on the basis of self-determination and territorial integrity; the United Kingdom must consequently invite the parties to hold a constitutional conference to set up a Constitution capable of creating a democratic and majority government on the basis of universal suffrage, on the pattern of “one man, one vote.” On the subject of illegal power, as long as the United 142. We consider that this is a unique opportunity to give the world proof of our unshakable determination to guarantee international peace and security, to provide proof that we are firmly determined to bring about freedom and social justice in our world, in accordance with the spirit and letter of our Organization’s Charter. The meeting rose at 6,30 pm. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS United Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, Seles Section, New York or Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sont en vente dans les librairies et les agences ddpositaires du monde entier. Informez-vous auprt?s de votre libraire ou adressex-vous & : Nations Unies, Section des ventes, New York ou Gen&ve. ICAK IIOJlY’fEiTb HS~AHRSI OPrAHH3A4MM OFbE~HHEHHbIX HAQMW lil3AaHWR 0pl~tHH3tt4~~ 06’be~HHeHHbIX Hasml MOHCHO KYIIHTb 8 KHWiCHbIX MflI-Eb- 3Nmx H &n?HTc~Bax a0 BC~X pafiOHax pupa. HaaonuTe CnpaaKA 06 IrsAaHlGIX B r3amerd nmmc-30~ Mara3uHe mu numq~e no anpecy: OprariA3aqNR Ob’he~miemibfx HauuB, CeKswrr no npoaaxe HB~~HUR, HMO-Hoprc unu XCersesa. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas e&n en venta en librerfas y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirfjase a: Naciones Unidas, Seccidn de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S. 1 .OO (or equivalent in other currencies)