S/PV.1672 Security Council

Some representatives in letters addressed to me, have asked to participate, without vote, in the Council’s discussion of the item before it. They are the representatives of Burundi, Ethiopia, Liberia, Madagascar, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, the United Republic of Tanzania and Tunisia. As I hear no objection, I shall, in accordance with the provisional rules of procedure and the usual practice of the Council, invite them to participate, without vote, in our discussion. Letter dated 7 November 1972, addressed to the President of the Security Council by the representatives of Algeria, Botswana, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Dahomey, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Republic, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Zaire and Zambia (S/10828). 3. In view of the limited number of places at the Council table, I shall invite the representatives concerned to take the places reserved for them in the Council Chamber, Qn the understanding that they will be called to the Ccluncil table when it is their turn to speak. The meeting was called to order at 3.55 p.m. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Iv, Terence (Burundi), Mr. 2. Gabre-Se/lassie (Efhiopia), Mr, R. Weeks (Liberia), Mr. B. Rabetafika {Madagascar), Mr. 8. Ogbu (Nigertij, Mr. S. Pratt (Sierra Leone), Mr, S. Snlim (United Republic of Tanzania) and Mr. R. Driss (Tunisia) took the places reserved for them in the Council Chamber. Expression of thanks to the retiring President

Before proceeding to the agenda may I, first of all, on behalf of the Council and on my own behalf, following a good tradition of the Council, convey to the President of the Security Council for the month of October, the Ambassador of France, Mr, de Guiringaud, our gratitude for the way in which he conducted the proceedings of the Council, both in the official meetings and during the numerous consultations that were held. Ambassador de Guiringaud’s eminent qualities, reflected in the unceasing efforts he exerted in the Council’s service, made an outstanding contribution to the Council’s attempts to deal with, if not dispose of, the very difficult tasks it has to perform. It is with great pleasure therefore that, on behalf of the Council and on my own behalf, I pay a tribute to Mr. de Guiringaud.

The representatives of Somalia and the Sudan, in a letter dated 13 November 1972, addressed to the President of the Council [S/10830/ have requested that the persons men+ tioned in the document be invited to speak pursuant to rt.@ 39 of the provisional rules of procedure. If I,hear: np objection, I shall take it that the Council decides, py&u& 1, :‘ to that rule, to invite the persons mentioned in,docyment S/10830. Individual invitations to address the Counc.il wa be made at the proper time in the course of our proceedings and with the consent of the Council. 5. The Security Council will now proceed to consider the item on its agenda. I wish to draw the attention .of mkfnbers of the Council to document S/l0828 containing a letter from representatives of 37 Member States. Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted.

The delegation of Liberia is grateful for the opportunity to be heard during the Security Council’s consideration of the question of the African Territories under Portuguese administration. The sense of gratitude, I dare say, is shared also by the 41 independent African countries of the Organization of African Unity and by all those Africans everywhere who have dedicated their lives and their all to the early and total liberation of Africa and its peoples from the shackles of colonial domination, in harmony with the principles of equal rights and selfdetermination enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. 9. It is accordingly a matter of great significance that at such a time, when a call goes forth again from the United Nations for the exercise of the right of self-determination and independence by African peoples, which for centuries have beeil yoked to the miseries and indignities of all that colonialisti entails, an African lady of great distinction, warmth, perspicacity and prudence heads this important organ of the United Nations and presides over this historic meeting. Madam President, your elevation to the high and honourable office of President of the Security Council distinguishes you as the first lady of the continent of Africa and of the world to occupy this position. As an African I am particularly happy to share the pride you feel. I have every assurance that your conduct of the deliberations of the Security Council will result in a full measure of success at this meeting of the Council and will merit the full approbation of the international community. 10. In a letter dated 7 November 1972 a request was addressed to the President of the Security Council that the situation prevailing in the African Territories under Portuguese administration be considered as a matter of urgency, bearing in mind the circumstances which constitute a serious threat to international peace and security. 11. The number of African delegations which have appended their signatures to this request is, in my opinion, symptomatic of the vast extent of solicitude which the present situation in the African Territories under Portuguese administration has raised in a large sector of international public opinion, and reflects an expression of the great concern and anxiety about the situation in those Territories that is felt not only by the peoples of Africa but aho by the peoples of other continents which have a genuine interest in upholding freedom, justice and human dignity, in the realization of self-determination for all peoples, and in ensuring international peace and security. 12. Since the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was adopted by the General Assembly in 1960 [resolution 1514 (XV)] the question of Portuguesewadministered Territories in Africa has been a burning issue at the United Nations. Wow 13. Before attempting to answer these questions, let us first of all place the Portuguese presence in Africa in its historical perspective. 14. Portuguese interest in Africa dates as far back as the fifteenth century. By 1500, African slaves, gold, gum arabic and ivory were being exchanged for Portuguese products on a fairly regular basis. In West Africa Portugal’s principal interest was in gaining access to Timbuktu, then a major centre of trade in West Africa. That venture, however, was not successful, and Portugal concentrated on establishing trading posts along the coast. 15. With the development of a plantation economy in the New World and the demand for cheap labour, the slave trade became Portugal’s principal concern in West Africa. 11 is estimated that Portugal shipped between 500,000 and 800,000 African slaves to the New World in the last 75 years of the sixteenth century. 16. As the demand for slaves increased in the seventeenth century the Dutch eased the Portuguese out of the Gold Coast; the French installed themselves in Senegal; and England took over Gambia. Having been checkmated in West Africa, Portugal relied heavily on Angola to supply the bulk of slaves for the plantations in the New World. Later, another Portuguese slave-trading post was established id Dahomey. 17. By the end of the eighteenth century, however, Portuguese slave-trading posts in West Africa could not fulfil the ever-increasing demand for more slaves and Portugal turned its attention to the Congo. 18. In East Africa, Portugal was originally interested in gaining access to the gold and silver mines of Manica and Mashona and in promoting trade with India and the Far East. The emphasis then was on links with Asia. 19. Meanwhile the Portuguese shipped slaves from MOZ~ bique to India, and at times to West Africa and Portugal. As Angola and the Congo could not adequately meet the demand for slaves in the New World, Mozambique was used as a source to supplement the supply. It is estimated that from 1780 to 1800 about 10,000 slaves were shipped each year from Mozambique; the figure rose to about 15,000s year, and reached a peak of about 25,000 a Year for a decade, before declining after 1850. 20. In 1869 the Portuguese Government declared all slaves to be Zibertos: they were to be paid and treated like workers until they were freed. But in practice there was fI* clear distinction between a Ziberto and a slave. Nine Years later a labour code was enacted for Territories in Africa under Portuguese administration. Although that code abolished forced labour and replaced it by a system of contract labour, it was largely circumvented or ignored- Another code was promulgated in 1899 Which Iegalized 21. The motivating factor behind these labour laws was to regularize and legitimize a system in which cheap African labour could be exploited to the hilt. In the words of a distinguished scholar on Portuguese colonialism, Professor James Duffy: 27. A list of 12 principles submitted by the Special Committee was approved by the General Assembly in 1960 [resolution 1541 (XV)f. Among other things, it is stated that there is an obligation to transmit information on a Territory which is geographically separate and distinct, ethnically and/or culturally, from the administering Power. This obligation continues until the Territory attains a “full measure of self-government”: either by emergence as a sovereign independent State; or by free association with an independent State; or by integration with an independent State. Whatever the choice, the people of the Territory must decide freeIy and voluntarily. “There is little evidence that the African was civilized through work, while there is abundant evidence that he was degraded and exploited.” 22. This necessarily sketchy outline of Portuguese colonialism in Africa demolishes the claim of Portuguese leaders and their apologists that Portugal has been engaged in a “civilizing, Christian mission” in Africa. As we have seen, Portuguese colonialism was not engaged in an altruistic and benevolent mission in Africa; on the contrary, the Portuguese were interested only in draining Africa of its lifeblood. 28. On the basis of the foregoing criteria the Assembly decided that the Territories being administered by Portugal are Non-Self-Governing and that Portugal should transmit information on them, in keeping with Chapter XI of the Charter. 23. Let us now proceed to trace the efforts of the United Nations and Portuguese colonialism in Africa. With the, inception of the United Nations colonial Territories ceased to be hallowed pastures. The Atlantic Charter of 1941 had recognized the right of peoples to self-determination; the LJnited Nations Charter acknowledged that one of the principal purposes and mainstays of the Organization is, as stated in Article 1, paragraph 2: 29. In 1960 the Assembly adopted the historic Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. The following year the Assembly established the Special Committee of Twenty-Four, which assesses the progress made in implementing the Declaration on decolonization and makes recommendations as to how decolonization can be brought about. “To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace”. 30. The “wind of change” that swept across the African continent in the fifties and early sixties did not fail to have an effect in the African Territories administered by Portugal. In fact, even before the Second World War the Africans in those Territories had expressed their grievances and requested moderate reforms. As the Africans became more and more active politically, the Portuguese resorted to arrest, exile and torture. in this light, the four sponsoring Powers were unanimous in their recognition that the international community had a very high interest in the destiny of peoples under colonial exploitation and domination. And it is of course true to say that this principle of equal rights and self-determination underlies the very foundation of this Organization. 24. Under Chapter XI, Article 73 b of the Charter, all States Members of the United Nations undertook, among other things, to develop self-government in Non-Self- Governing Territories, “to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples” of those Territories “and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions”. 31. It gradually became clear to the Africans that the Portuguese authorities would understand nothing but force. In February 1961, with all avenues of rational discussions blocked by their Portuguese oppressors, the revolutionaries in Angola struck a blow for freedom and justice. On 20 February 1961 the Liberian delegation, joined later by 34 other African and Asian States, requested an urgent meeting of the Security Council to consider the situation in Angola. 25. In 1946, the General Assembly drew attention to the fact that Chapter XI of the Charter was in force and called upon Member States to implement its provisions. The Secretary-General, Trygve Lie, accordingly requested Member States to inform him of Territories on which they intended to submit information. At the time, eight Member States administered Non-Self-Governing Territories; and altogether they submitted a list of 74 Territories. Portugal was not approached as it was not then a Member of the United Nations. 32. During the debate which followed in the Security Council the representative of Portugal attempted to hoodwink the Council by claiming that the situation in Angola was simply a case of the maintenance of public order in a sovereign State, and that Portuguese-administered Territories had become “overseas provinces” of Portugal. The Afro-Asian representatives naturally rejected that claim. But the NATO Powers on the Council, with the exception 34. Unfortunately that draft failed to secure the required majority. Sri Lanka, Liberia, Egypt and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics voted in favour of the draft. No delegation voted against the draft, but seven countries-the United Kingdom, Turkey, France, Chile, China, Ecuador and the United States-abstained. 35. Because of the Council’s inaction the situation in Ahgola continued to worsen. Forty African and Asian S&es thetifote brought the question before the Geheral &&inbfy. an 2P April 1961 the Assembly adopted rdriblu&fr 1603 (XV), which was similar in its operative prdvisiofis to the draft resolution that had been rejected by the Security Courfcil. 36. By the end of May 1961 the conflict in Angola had resulted in the loss of thousands of lives &fid the flight of tens of thousands of refugees. This matter was again b?ought before the Security Council by 44 African and Asian States. On 6 June Sri Lanka, Egypt and Liberia submitte’d a draft resolutionz to the Council which, among other things, deplored.the large-scale killings in Angola and. ‘stated that a continuktibn of the conflict in the Territory was ‘&i .aCfual and potential cause of international friction and a threat to interfiational peace and security. The @uhc~l’ adopted that resolution, which was amended to read that the bituation in Angola was “likely to endanger iha .ni&tenance of international peace and security”. Additionally, the resoliution called for a peaceful solution td tlieie:pjrobl’eti in Angola. : . I I ; $0, Thus, in resolution 163 (1961) the Security Council finally deoided that the conflict in Angola was likely to digturb international peace and security. However, in spite of the Council’s resolution, Portugal continued its colonial war against the Africans in Angola. Hence, on 30 January 1962 the General Assembly, in resolution 1742 (XVI), among other things, deprecated the repressive and military measures perpetrated by Portugal against the people of Angola. In addition, the Assembly called on Portugal to release political prisoners and establish freely elected and representative political institutions with a view to the transfer af power to the Angolans. 38. In two separate resolutions in December 1962, resolutions 1807 (XVII) and 1819 (XVII), the Assembly, iizfer al/u, Widemned Portugal’s colonial war, called on Portugal 1 Offftcial Records of the Security Council, Sixteenth Year, Supplemekt for January, Februav and March 1961, document S/4133/Rev.l. 2 Ibid, Slxreenth Yea?, 950th meeting, para. 38. 39. The intransigence of the Portuguese colonial& Angola convinced the African nationalists in Guir (Bissau) that force was the only language that the ru] clique in Lisbon understood. Accordingly, in January 191 the freedom fighters of Guinea (Bissau) took up ar against their Portuguese oppressors. 40. Because of the continued intransigence of the Pan guese colonialists the Special Committee of Twenty.Fo recommended, on 4 July 1963, that the Security Coun consider the situation in Portuguese-administered Tel tories in Africa so that appropriate measures could be tak to secure Portugal’s compliance with United Natio resolutions on Territories under Portuguese rule. 41. On 31 July 1963 the Council adopted resolutil 180 (1963) which declared that the situation in f Territories was “seriously disturbing peace and securily Africa”. Among other things, the Council called ( Portugal to recognize the right of the inhabitants of the Territories to self-determination and independence. Adi tionally, the Council affirmed that Portugal’s policy, wbi held that Portuguese-administered Territories were lntegi parts of metropolitan Portugal, was contrary to the Uniti Natidns Charter and to relevant United Nations resolutior The Council also requested that all States should refra from assisting Portugal in its repressive measures in tl Territories. 42. In October 1963 the Secretary-General reported th his representative had visited Lisbon in September of th year and had met Prime Minister Saiazar and 0th’ Portuguese officials to arrange for talks to be hell Subsequently talks were held in New York between tl representatives of the African States and Portugal. UI fortunately, during those talks the Portuguese insisteda defining self-determination as “the agreement and COWI of the population to a certain political structure, type{ State and administrative organizstion”.s As this restricti definition excluded the right to independence, the Africa States naturally refused to accept it. 43. On 11 December 1963 the Security Council res firmed the interpretation of self-determination as laid do!+ in the historic Declaration on decolonization in 196o.n interpretation is that “All peoples have the right 11 self-detennhation; by virtue of that right they frcd determine their political status and freely Pursue fiti economic, social and cultural development”. 4-l. Meanwhile a number of United Nations bodies tooi action to isolate Portugal. In August 1963 the u&e{ Nations Conference on International Travel and Tourism 3 Ibid., Eighteenth Year, Supplement for October, Novsmbsr4’ December 1963, document S/5448, para. 11 1 45. At this point the Africans in Mozambique also came to the very painful conclusion that force was the only means by which they could obtain freedom and justice. Accordingly, in September 1964, the freedom fighters in Mezambique resorted to armed struggle in an effort to rid their Territory of Portuguese colonialism. 46. In November 1965 the Security Council adopted resolution 218 (1965) which, among other things, called on Portugal to negotiate with authorlzed representatives of political parties within and outside Territories under Portuguese rule with a view to the transfer of power to freely elected and representative political institutions. 47. On 21 December 1965, the General Assembly, in resolution 2107 (XX), inter alia, recognized the legitimacy of the peoples of the African Territories under Portuguese rule to achieve the rights laid down in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. “ . Portugal is situated in Europe; the fact that it is a dictatorship is a matter for the Portuguese to settle. But no decree of the Portuguese dictator, nor legislation passed by any Parliament in Portugal, can make Africa part of Europe. The only thing which could convert a part of Africa into a constituent unit in a union which also includes a European State would be the freely expressed will of the people of that part of Africa. There is no such popular will in the Portuguese colonies. On the contrary, . , . the peoples of all three Territories have taken up arms against the colonial Power. They have done this despite the heavy odds against them, and despite the great suffering they know to be involved.“6 48. As recently as yesterday, 14 November 1972, the General Assembly adopted resolution 2918 (XXVII), which : “AjErms that the national liberation movements of Angola, Guinea (Bissau) and Cape Verde and Mozambique are the authentic representatives of the true aspirations of the peoples of those Territories and recommends that, pending the accession of those Territories to independence, all Governments, the specialized agencies and other organizations within the United Nations system and the United Nations bodies concerned should, when dealing with matters pertaining to the Territories, ensure the representation of those Territories by the liberation movements concerned, in an appropriate capacity and in consultation with the Organization of African Unity”. 51. In their frantic attempt to keep the Africans in Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) under perpetual colonial domination, the Portuguese have gone to the length even of violating the territorial integrity of certain African States. 52. I will not attempt to burden the Council any longer by further documenting the case against Portugal. It is abundantly clear that the Portuguese colonialists stand condemned before the world community. And this brings us to the most important question before this Council, That question is: What should the United Nations do to end Portuguese colonialism in Africa and assure self-determination for the people in the Territories concerned? 49. The African Territories under Portuguese domination are no longer isolated places in a faraway continent. Developments in those Territories under the oppression and suppression of Portugal must be viewed in the light of all the events that have been shaping the world and the present atmosphere in Africa. As the late President Tubman of Liberia remarked in his address before the General Assembly on 23 October 196 1: 53. An examination of the situation in Angola, Guinea (Bissau) and Cape Verde and Mozambique, a review of the actions taken by the Organization since 1960, with particular reference to its most recent resolution 2918 (XXVII), ‘1 ., I self-determination is basically the right of any group of people to shape their own future, ensure their own cultural and spiritual heritage, be responsible for their own social order, enhance their own material progress, create their own system of values and, in the end, make their own distinctcontribution to the civilization of 6Ibti., Twenty-fourth Session, Annexes, agenda item 106, document A/7754. 65. May I also convey, to you, and through you to the members of the Council, our deep appreciation for being permitted to address the Council today as one of the Foreign Ministers of the Organization of African Unity. As an African yourself, you naturally understand how close to our hearts is the question of decolonizing our continent and freeing it from the tentacles of neo-colonialism, 70. A major characteristic of Portuguese colonial policy can be found in two main areas. Firstly, Portugal does not consider that the Africans possess the same rights as whites, and secondly Portugal continues to hold on to the legal fiction that the socalled overseas provinces in Africa constitute integral parts of the Portuguese nation which, as everybody knows, is located in Europe. The Portuguese authorities also claim that the African inhabitants of its Territories-Angola, Mozambique, Guinea (Bissau), Cabinda and Sgo Tome and Principe-have no right to a separate identity, that to all intents and purposes, these blacks are Portuguese citizens. 66. When I spoke in the General Assembly on 10 October this year, I said that “In scattered pockets of the continent”-that is, Africa-“colonialist Powers like Portugal continue to impose the yoke of colonialism and imperialist domination on peace-loving Africans in continued defiance” of resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council and in opposition to the aspirations of countries which have won their independence the hard way and now face a new form of neo-imperialism. I continued: “Certain big Powers not only directly interfere in their internal affairs, but even stir up internal subversion and mercenary activity in order to topple progressive African Governments not to their liking.“7 71. But, until recently, this picture was far from true. We learn that as recently as 1961 in Angola less than 1 per cent of four million Africans were recognized as assimilated Portuguese. The Native Statute of 1954 provides: “A person shall be considered an indi@nrr . . . if he is a member of the negro race or a descendant of a member of that race, and was born, or habitually resides, in the province but does not yet possess the level of education or the personal or social habits which are a condition for the unrestricted application of the public and private law pertaining to Portuguese citizens,” 67. I said that also advisedly, Madam President. Just under two years ago your brave and indomitable country was wantonly attacked by the forces of imperialism spearheaded by none other than the Government of Portugal, which, utterly frustrated at the successes of nationalistic movements in Guinea (Bissau) and their close relations with your Government and people, attempted an invasion of your country with dissident elements. We are indeed gratified at and we rejoice wholeheartedly with you on your crowning success at foiling the machinations of the enemy and safeguarding your home and hearth. The unity of your brave people was remarkable and is an indication that the forces of good will triumph over those of evil as represented by the arch colonialists. We again congratulate you on your great and historic victory. 72. It was only possible for an African’s status to be changed and for him to acquire the citizenship of the colonizer and become an ussimilado if he fulfulled the following requirements: (a) he was over 18 years of age; (b) he could speak the Portuguese language correctly; (c) he was engaged in an occupation, trade or craft, from which he derived sufficient income to support himself and his family, or had adequate resources for that purpose; (d) he was of good conduct and had attained the level of education and acquired the habits which are a condition for the unrestricted application of the public and private law pertaining to Portuguese citizens; and (e) he was not on record as having refused to perform military service or as having deserted. 68. During the course of the twenty-seventh session, my delegation was fortunate enough to listen to two great sons of Africa who addressed the Fourth Committee of the General Assembly on the struggle they have undertaken on behalf of and with the support of their peoples. Both Mr. Amrlcar Cab&, Secretary-General of the Partido Africano da Independencia da Guine e Cabo Verde (PAIGC) and Mr. Marcelino dos Santos, Vice-President of the Frente de LibertacPo de Mogambique (FRELIMO) have described in detail the situation existing in their countries, the great tasks confronting them as well as Portugal’s intransigence on the question of peaceful negotiations leading to a transfer of political power and sovereignty to the local African population under their control as some other former colonial Powers had done in Africa and elsewhere. 73. Only when he was proved to have satisfied all these requirements could the African be accorded the rights of citizenship as an assimilado. The process whereby an African could be considered a citizen is indeed a long and demanding one. For the whites, citizenship was a matter of course. 74, Under the circumstances, therefore, conscript labour, political repression and social discriminatian were a natural concomitant of the Statute, and this led to the 1961 revolt in Angola, which in turn spread to Mozambique and socalled Portuguese Guinea and necessitated by 1968 the flight of approximately 500,000 refugees from these 7 Ibid., Twenty-seventh Session, Plenary Meetings, 2060th meeting, para. 137. 76. My delegation listened with rapt attention to our friends and brothers from Guinea (Bissau) and Mozambique when, with the calm and collected disposition of mature minds, they gave expression to the positions their move. merits now hold and the priorities to which they consider themselves bound. Their restraint is remarkable for it is an indication of their flexibility of approach-tough fighters in the battlefield, but level-headed and balanced as well as astute practitioners of the art of reai politics around the conference table. 77. Mr. Cabral has called for contacts bet.ween the Portuguese delegation and the PAIGC delegation with a view to the holding of negotiations at the level of the Portuguese Government and the representatives of his Party. 78, His’ second point is for the United Nations to establish a special committee to deal exclusively with the decolonization process of Territories under Portuguese domination. After nearly ten years of a genocidal war launched by the Portuguese authorities against his people, his forces have liberated approximately two thirds of Guinea (Bissau), as the special mission of the United Nations to that country could easily testify. 79. Mr. Cabral left his third point as the last resort if everything else failed. Then and only then, devoid of hope for a peaceful and reasoned peace, would they decide to continue the struggle to its logical conclusion-to the bitter end. 80. Both Mr. Cabral and Mr. DOS Santos stress the effective control their movements have over certain areas of their respective territories. In the case of Mozambique, approximately one fourth of the land is in their hands. Both have expressed claims of effective control over their 82. Once again the Security Council has been summoned to consider the affront, being persistently shown to the international community by Portugal’s flagrant disregard oh our many resolutions. 83. Again and again it has been pointed out and accepted by the great mass of the civilized world that the system of colonialism is a disguised institution of territorial slavery. Metropolitan Powers, with possibly one or two exceptions, cling on to their Territories in order to exact the last ounce of flesh, so to speak, from these Territories. They often say that they hold on to the Territories for purely altruistic reasons. This, however, is not the case on close exams ination. 84. Why does Portugal in particular continue to hold on to its African Territories in the face of violent opposition? 85. In my address to the General Assembly in 1971, I observed that although many States in the civilized world had recognized the fact that colonies were no longer tenable institutions in the latter years of the twentieth century, nevertheless Portugal still clung to the idea that il could withstand the tide. For reasons which I shall explain in a moment, Portugal peddles the idea that the Portugueg colonies are not colonies under the strict interpretation and intention of Article 73 of the United Nations Charter, but that they are rather overseas States of Portugal. The reporl of the Special Committee of Twenty-Four, covering its work during 1972, has drawn attention to a Iecture, OJI Portugal’s geographical expression at the Institute of Hi&r Military Studies, in which Portugal was described as s nation with 4.2 per cent of its area and 41 per cent of its population in Europe, and 95 per cent of its area and 55 per cent of its population in Africa.6 Only Portugal still clings to the myth of pluri-continentalism. It is necessary 10 emphasize this fact, as otherwise appeals will be made in vain for a solution of the problem. 86. In 1970 and 1971 there had been discussions h Portugal about changing the law governing the constitutions of the overseas territories. The international world was at 8 Ibid., Twenty-seventh Session, Supplement NO. 23, vdl1f~ chap. X, annex II, sect. A, para. 7. “The jurisdiction of the National Assembly, the Government and the Courts of Justice in the overseas Territories remains substantially the same. Under the new provisions, the National Assembly retains exclusive Iegislative competence in: (a) the general regime of the overseas Territories; (b) the definition of the competence of the central Government and the territorial Governments in regard to concessions of land and other rights which involve exclusive or special privileges; and (c)the authorization of contracts, other than those for loans, when requiring security or special guarantees. In addition, it may also legislate on matters affecting the whole of the national territory or when affecting part of the national territory which includes Portugal and one or more of the overseas Territories.“9 91. The report also states that: 88. The report goes on to point out that the Lisbon Government would retain the authority to superintend the administration of the overseas Territories. The Lisbon Government would continue to have powers to legislate in respect of the overseas Territories on matters affecting the higher interests of the State, and so forth. The Lisbon Overseas Minister retains his competence to legislate on a number of subjects for the Territories and also retains his power to revoke or annul all or part of the legislation enacted in the Territories when such legislation was considered unconstitutional, illegal or “Contrary to the higher interest of the State”. The Lisbon Overseas Minister retains the supervision of the entire public administration of the overseas Territories, the appointment, transfer or termination of the territorial public service personnel, the authorization of the concession of public utilities, and so forth. Except in the change in rank of the Governors General and their right to attend the Council of Ministers when called, there appear to be no important changes in the powers and funcnons of the Governors. They continue to retain the right to veto legislation. “Mrs. SincKtica Torres, the only Angolan Deputy of African descent, and a member of the Angola Legislative Council representing administrative bodies; said that, in supporting the proposed reforms, she expressed the aspirations of the majority of the African populations of Angola. Total autonomy or hypothetical independence was inconceivable in the Territories as the majority of the population were not yet mature enough to be able to express themselves.“1 1 92. At a press conference in Brasilia, in September 1971 the Premier: ‘I . . . denied that Portugal maintained a rigid and inflexible position on its overseas Territories, either for economic, political or strategic reasons, or simply for colonial reasons. He said that the Territories had always been Portuguese provinces for historical, constitutional and social reasons, and implied that it was not that Portugal’s policy was inflexible but that the relationship between Portugal and the overseas provinces was based on a historical imperative not subject to change. He explained that the overseas provinces had formed part of the Portuguese nation since they had been discovered or inhabited by Portuguese nationals, and had been integrated into the nation without any discrimination and without any conditions.“1 2 89. The report of the Special Committee concludes as follows: “From the foregoing analysis, it is clear that while the general principles hold out eventual promise for much wider autonomy to the Territories, the new law introduces only minor changes in the existing system of Government in the overseas Territories. Real power remains’ vested in what the Constitution calls the organs of sovereignty. Since the power of these organs lies in the hands of the Portuguese population in Portugal, it is 93, In October 197 1, Mr. Manuel Pimentel dos Santos was appointed Governor-General of Mozambique. In his state- 10 Ibid., para. 54. 11 Ibid., para. 20. 12 Ibid., para. 64. 9 Ibid,, para. 38. 94. Portugal often boasts that it is not a poor country; it sometimes points to its enormous gold reserves. Its balance of payments position seems impregnable. How do&s it achieve this? Portugal would deny, of course, that overseas dependencies have anything to do with such apparent prosperity. An examination of the facts would prove the contrary, 95. The report of the Committee of TwentyFour has explained how the strategies of Portugal’s policy, started in 1961, established a system of Espo$o portig&s-a commercial network comprising Portugal and all the overseas Territories. The result was that: “Since all inter-territorial payments had to be made in metropolitan escudos, in effect, the gold and foreign exchange earnings of the Territories benefit the escudo zone reserves. Between 1966 and 1970, Portugal’s gold and foreign exchange reserves rose from 33,725 million escudos to 45,507 million escudos, an increase of about 33 per cent. Between 1969 and 1970 alone, Portugal’s rise in foreign exchange assets amounted to 2,547 million escudos.‘Lrs 96. Those were the figures that Mr. U. Alexis Johnson, United States Under-Secretary for Political Affairs of the Department of State probably had in mind in February 1972 when in a statement made before the United States Senate Commission on Foreign Relations he refuted newspaper reports that the Conflict in Africa had put a strain on . Portugal’s foreign exchange reserves and that United States assistance would relieve that strain, by pointing out that Portugal’s gold and foreign exchange reserves had reached an all-time record of almost 1,800 million United States dollars, equivalent to about 14 months’ imports. 97. While Portugal was accumulating such a favourable balance of payments, Angola and Mozambique continued to have difficulties in covering their purchases in Portugal because of the lack of foreign exchange or metropolitan escudos. As a result, funds waiting to be paid in Portugal accumulated. 98. The report of the Committee of Twenty-Four tells us that: “At the end of 1968, the net debits of the two Territories pending payment amounted to 2,930 million escudos and at the end of 1969, 5,090 million escudos.“’ 4 99. Futile attempts were made to create local branches of the Central control machinery in 1969 and to establish a system of priorities for transfers in settlement of external payments. 13Ibid., para. 137. 14 Ibid., para. 138. 100. The Committee of Twenty-Four continued with the following observations: “Portuguese sources have freely admitted that the balance of payments difficulties of the two larger Territories with Portugal were aggravated by the measures adopted to create free trade within the escudo zone. Apart from the measures noted Lbove, involving the gradual dismantling of quotas and tariffs against goods from any Territory, including Portugal, within the escudo zone, other measures also caused difficulties. These included measures restricting the development of indus. tries in the Territories which would compete with goods from Portugal . , . so that Angola and Mozambique became captive markets for Portuguese goods, including such items as textiles, wine, olive oil and other consumer goods. Traditionally also, while the Territories were prohibited from developing any shipping of their own, all movement of goods among the Territories themselves and between the Territories and Portugal was restricted to Portuguese ships. “The difficulties experienced in Angola and Mozam. bique over the payments problem were not solely the result of these measures. One of the problems in Angola, cited in many articles, has been the granting of special privileges to some of the large companies, including the Angola Diamond Company, exempting them either totally or partially from exchange controls.“1 6 101. In the face of such evidence, my delegation is at a loss to understand how the Portuguese can say that they are not bleeding their Territories to death. 102, The Committee of Twenty-Four has called attention to the policy now being pursued in Angoll. The report points out that: “The implications of this policy are quite cIear. First, the development and exploitation of the Territory’s resources will provide Portugal with much needed raw materials which it would otherwise have to purchase with its foreign exchange reserves.“’ 7 103. Even Portuguese economic interests in the Territory of Angola have become increasingly dissatisfied with the control being exercised by the Portuguese Government in Lisbon. “ . . . Expressions of their dissatisfaction with the Territorial Government have included charges of inefficiency and even embezzlement.“ls 15 Ibid., para. 140. 16 Ibid., paras. 141 and 142. 17 Ibid., sect. B, para. 16. 18 Ibti., para. 17. That is the view of the Portuguese in Angola. 111. As originally established, ZAMCO comprised 12 companies-5 with their headquarters in the Federal Republic of Germany, 3 companies in France, 1 in Sweden, and 3 in South Africa. During 1969 the Swedish firm, Allmene Svenska Elektriska Aktisbolaget-otherwise known as ASEA-withdrew its participation in the project. ZAMCO was then reorganized to include 8 new companies, of which 6 are French, 1 Italian and 1 Portuguese. Early in 1970 Italy was reported to have decided to withdraw its participation in the Cabora Bassa project. 105. As far as the Christianizing aspect is concerned, it is pertinent to record that after centuries of Portuguese rule, published statistics make it abundantly clear that the African inhabitants remain illiterate, socially uncared for and politically backward. Indeed, modern progress has come to many of these Territories only after the liberation movements have brought a touch of freedom to them. 106. Let me dwell for a moment on one of the economic issues: the Cabora Bassa Dam. There is a growing international concern that the future of Mozambique may depend on the outcome of the proposed Cabora Bassa Dam project. Specifications for the dam call for a wall which will be about 550 feet high and almost 1,000 feet long. The dam, which willcreatealake 15milesatthebroadestpointstretching back some 150miles to theZambianborder,willhaveastorage capacity of 65,000 million cubic,metres. It will be the third largest in the world, twice the size of the Kariba Dam and 70 per cent larger than the Aswan Dam. 112. Apart from bringing in thousands of new European settlers to Mozambique, the Cabora Bassa Dam project requires the removal of some 25,000 Africans from the area which will eventually be inundated. The Africans will be removed from their long established homes and transplanted to newer resettled areas. 113, Work on the Cabora Bassa Dam project is expected to involve a large number of other firms outside the ZAMCO consortium. For instance, Compagnie des chantiers internationaux of France is expected to be responsible for much of the civil construction work of the dam, and the Compagnie de constructions intemationales will be associated with Entreprise Fougerolle in the building of the generating station. There are reports that Barclays Bank DC0 of the United Kingdom will be involved in the fmancing of the Cabora Bassa Dam project. 107. At the centre of the project is an agreement under which Mozambique will provide South Africa with a new source of hydroelectric power. Indeed, the Portuguese Government decided to proceed with the construction of the dam only after it had secured the agreement of the Electricity Supply Commission of South Africa (ESCOM) to guarantee the purchase of 1,000 megawatts a year from 1974, and increasing thereafter by 1,700 megawatts a year by 1980. 114. I have already mentioned that there is growing international concern over the project and its possible effects on the future of Mozambique. In adopting an omnibus resolution on the Portuguese Territories in December 1970 [resolution 2707(XXV)], the General Assembly welcomed the action taken by the fmancial groups in certain States to withdraw their participation in the project, but requested “the Governments which have not yet done so to withdraw from the activities relating to the Cabora Bassa project in Mozambique”. In resolution 2795 (XXVI), adopted on 10 December 1971-which, incidentally, was Human Rights Day-the General Assembly requested those Governments that had failed to prevent their nationals and companies from participating in the Cabora Bassa project in Mozambique and the Cunene River Basin project in Angola “to take all the necessary measures to terminate their participation and to withdraw immediately from all activities related to those projects”. 108. Concern also arises from the fact that the Portuguese plans for the Zambezi Valley envisage the development for settlement and other purposes of an area of 140,000 kilometres-about one tenth of the total territory. Indeed, a new township is to be established on the Songo Plateau near the dam site to house the families of some 4,000 technical and other personnel who will be engaged in the construction of the dam. A 31.4 million escudos coptract to Fabrica Born Sucesso for the construction of prefabricated houses for European workers has already been awarded. Another 15 ,million escudo contract has been awarded to the firm of Krueger for the construction of the water supply system for the new township. f9 12&f., para. 25. 116. The response to these pleas has been pathetic. The Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom said in the House of Lords on 15 October 1969 that it was “not Her Majesty’s Government’s policy to discourage or prevent British companies from engaging in legitimate trade or dealings in Mozambique”. 117. He went on to state that there was no law in Britain which made it an offence for a British bank to finance the operation of any South African company constructing a dam and power project in Mozambique. In June 1971, Sir Alec Douglas-Home, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs of the United Kingdom, paid a two-day official visit to Portugal. Sir Alec was quoted as saying at a banquet given in his honour that he believed that his visit opened up new opportunities for Portugal and the United Kingdom, and that, in spite of differences of opinion between the two countries, the historical relationship between them had not been affected. In March 1972, the Portuguese Foreign Minister made an official visit to London and had talks with the British Foreign Office. Following those talks, a British Foreign Office spokesman made it clear that items discussed had covered development in the Portuguese Territories in southern Africa. 118. It appears that France follows the same policy as Britain. The French Secretary of State for Information, Mr. L&o Hamon, is reported to have said, after the visit of the French Foreign Minister, Mr. Maurice Schumann, to Lisbon, that France would definitely participate in the Cabora Bassa project, which was “essentially of benefit to the Africans”. 119. The opposition of FRELIMO to the project is well known. This opposition is shared by members of the Organization of African Unity. We consider the Cabora Bassa project as a comprehensive economic and political scheme to ensure white domination and perpetuate colonialist rule in southern Africa, and therefore we regard the involvement of foreign capital in Cabora Bassa and any other scheme in that Territory as a hostile act against the people of Mozambique. 120. We are therefore appealing to the Security Council to mcognize that the Cabora Bassa project constitutes a threat to the peace and security of Africa so that this Council will initiate the necessary measures to bring the project to an abrupt end. 122. A3 long ago as the early 19SOs, the hydro-electric, mineral and agricultural potential of the Zambezi valley had been under study by the Portuguese Government. Indeed, work on the Cabora Bassa dam had at one time been expected ‘to begin under the transitional Development Plan for 1965-1967. 123. The Zambian Information and Tourist Bureau for Western Europe submitted a paper on the threat3 to the ecology of southern Africa to the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held at Stockholm. The Bureau drew attention to the established fact that mammoth projects such as the Cabora Bassa project were potential catastrophes that could result from faulty design, engineering construction and so on. Apart from constituting potential disaster areas, the Cunene project and the Cabora Bassa project were bound to cause the following phenomena with their inevitable consequences: (a) disruption of hydrographic balance; (b) rise in earthquake frequency; (c)effects on river fisheries and sea outlet fisheries; (d) effects of industrial pollution; (e) effects on periodically flooded areas; and (f) direct effects on human populations. 124. It appears that some of the above points have been influencing the Portuguese Government itself, since that Government recently created a Commission of Scientific Research for Cabora Bassa, particularly to examine the disruption of ecological balance resulting from the creation of the huge artificial lake, which was bound drastically to modify the environment. If the errors made in the past by the developed continents of Europe and North America are to be avoided, then both the Cabora Bassa and the Cunene projects must first be submitted to a meticulous examination from an ecological viewpoint, such as is being done in nuclear ballistic or astronautical fields. It is clear that Portugal has not undertaken such a study. We are therefore urging the abandonment for the time being of the Cabora Bassa and Cunene projects. We are not alone in this. Indeed, the neighbouring African countries have made it clear that these projects are against the wishes of the local populations of contiguous countries such as Zambia and the United Republic* of Tanzania. The problem becomes a much more burning issue as both the Cabora Bassa and the Cunene projects call for the installation of foreign white settlers in Mozambique and Angola, a process which has already started. 125. Just over a month ago, the Foreign Minister of Portugal addressed the General Assembly and gave full expression to the Portuguese ideas of colonialism. He reminded us that in 1955 Portugal was admitted as a Member State of the United Nations, with its whole national territory, in terms of the Portuguese political Constitution, He thereby implied that the overseas Territories were part of the Portuguese State. He went on to admit that certain countries did not consider those overseas Territories as integral parts of Portugal, and that those And again he emphasized that: “Portugal . . . will [never] bring into existence white independence or black independence. The unity of the Portuguese nation is the mainstay and the guarantee of the multiracial society which we have built up in Africa,“% 1 He took pains again and again to stress that: “The overseas provinces of Portugal are not and have never been dependencies of the European part of Ports gal. The system of legal, political, social and ethnic values is the same throughout the Portuguese territory. That is why we find it difficult to understand that this system should be labelled as colonial, since the colonial system is essentially a system of dependency, subordination and economic exploitation of one territory for the benefit of another, under the same sovereignty. There is nothing like that in the Portuguese system. Therefore, it is not surprising that we reject the label of colonialists, because our system is, and has always been, different.“22 128. The Lisbon regime was reassured by its allies and accomplices that the usual assistance and collaboration would continue. Premier Caetano declared as recently as March 1972 that Portugal would continue to subjugate the Peoples of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) by intensifying its war of genocide. Portugal’s budget for 1972 envisages an increase of over 2.4 million escudos of extraordinary expenditure above the 1971 budget. This increase would be wholly absorbed by the colonial wars. 126, It is because Portugal considers these dependent overseas Territories as part of its national territory that it believes that it can attack inhabitants of those Territories who express their desire for freedom and independence. It is because Portugal considers those Territories as part of its mainland that it arrogates to itself the task of invading neighbouring African States which give sanctuary to the oppressed people from those Territories. It is because Portugal considers those colonies as states or provincial enciaves of European Portugal that it continues to utilize assistance given to it by NATO, not for improving its domestic economy, but for waging the worst form of genocidal war, involving napalm and chemicals, against defenceless Africans. There are times when the effect of persistently holding warped notions of sovereignty creates conditions in which international maniacs can thrive. In such conditions wars are inevitable. We are therefore appealing to the Security Council to realize that Portuguese intransigence is fast nursing the seeds of such demoniacal conditions. Portuguese colonial policy is fast becoming a threat to world peace. That is why we are ca.Bing upon the Security Council to act now. 129. In order to get NATO involved even more in their war of genocide in Africa, the Portuguese are concocting the view that it is the communists who are opposing Portuguese colonialism, and not the freedom-seeking Africans. Consequently, President Am&ico Tomas concluded his New Year message with the following: “What, therefore, are the reasons behind the obstinate campaign against Portugal, whose only and rightful desire is to retain territories that were discovered, peopled and civilized over 500 years ago and have since then been integral parts of Portugal? It is perfectly understandable that the communist countries, in order to spread their political doctrines and to furtber their aspirations for world domination, should continue increasingly to step up the anti-Portuguese campaign. But that the Western countries, at least those whichhave resisted the infiltration of communism, should ingloriously follow the same course-this is an aberration that I have always failed to understand.” 130. Bearing in mind the massive involvement of foreign economic interests, it is understandable that Mr. Caetano should have declared in August 1971 that Portugal had fought alone for 10 years without help, and lamented the fact there there was no understanding in Europe that Portugal was “defending Western civilization in Africa”. 127, We must not overlook the role military and economic interests are playing in helping Portugal execute with impunity its policies of colonial oppression in the African continent. For how else can Portugal, the poorest country 20 Ibid., TweMpSQvQnth Session, Plenary Meetings, 2048th meeting, para. 41. 21 Ibid., para. 46. 131. Certain NATO countries, for which the word “communism” is anathema, therefore feel themselves 22 Ibid., para. 48. 132. First, NATO bases established in Portugal, financed and manned by the United States and West Germany, have increased Portugal’s foreign-currency resources, permitting the purchase of military supplies from other countries. 133. Secondly, Portuguese military personnel receive NATO military training in the United States. Others have attended NATO courses at the NATO Defence College in Paris, and in West Germany. Britain’s naval colleges and training centres have also trained many Portuguese naval officers and personnel. The London Daily Telegraph mag azine of 21 January 1972 made the following very interesting reveIation: “In the autumn of 1970, the CIA”-that is to say, the United States Central Intelligence Agency-“arranged for the supply of 20 war-surplus B-26 bombers to Portugal, and a few of its special-forces officers and sabotage experts were sent to Portuguese Guinea to train a raiding force. The CIA and its Portuguese friends were, however; misled . . . about the support the invaders could expect from the local population. Although the invaders succeeded in occupying for a few hours the radio station and a few public buildings in the Guinean capital, Conakry, they had to withdraw with heavy casualties and the invasion attempt ended in disaster”. 134. Thirdly, the NATO partnership permits the richer nations, in particular the United States, to make available to the others for their mutual defence military equipment they could not otherwise afford. Obviously such transactions rarely take place on an ordinary commercial basis. For example, Canada has made available to Portugal 19 Beech C-43 Expeditor light aircraft, an aircraft suitable for military operations in Portugal’s African colonies. Although most transfers of equipment from one NATO partner to another include a clause specifying that the equipment supplied must only be used for NATO purposes or on NATO territory, this has not at all prevented their use in Africa. After one such transaction a Portuguese Govemment spokesman declared: “It was agreed within the spirit of the North Atlantic Pact. It was agreed that the planes would be used only for defensive purposes within Portuguese territory. Portuguese territory extends to Africa- Angola, Mozambique and Portuguese Guinea.” In fact, correspondents of Der Spiegel, the West German newspaper, and the British Sunday Times have reported the use of those aircraft in Mozambique, Angola and Guinea (Bissau). It is interesting to note here that on 29 June 1971 the Lisbon newspaper Diario da Noticias revealed for the first time that the Portuguese colonial army in Mozambique was using the West German jet fighter aircraft Fiat G-91 NATO type Rd. The 40 Fiat G-91 aircraft were given to Portugal in 1966 by the West German Government for “defence purposes” within the NATO framework. 136. In short, since the armed struggle for national liberation began in Angola, Guinea (Bissau) and Mozambique, certain NATO member States have supplied military equipment, arms and ammunition to Portugal in addition to gi*g help in the survival of the crumbling Portuguese economy by increasing their imports from and exports to Portugal and by investing heavily in Portugal as well as in the three colonies. 137. The massive doses of economic and military assistance Portugal receives from certain Governments, especially its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies and its trading partners, continue to bolster it and enable it to carry out its policy of repression against our fellow Africans, 138. Although appeals have been made repeatedly to those States through the medium of the General Assembly and the Security Council, it is a well-known fact that interested governments continue to supply Portugal with all the arms it needs to carry out its repressive colonial policies, thus adding to the threat to international peace and security. 139. On the level of the private sector the States friendly to Portugal encourage their nationals to conduct financial and economic relations with the States with a view to helping to exploit the human and natural resources of the Territories under its domination. Only last December the Government of the United States of America concluded an agreement with Portugal which stipulates the payment to the latter of more than $400 million in all-purpose aid SO that the United States can continue to occupy the Azores as a military base. Of course, the United States will explain its action as being consistent with its over-all policy of national defence. I have no quarrels with it, but, in these days of ICBMs and nuclear submarines, can the United States honestly say it needs that kind of base? 140. My delegation is requesting the Security Council once again to try to influence the NATO friends of Portugd to withdraw their financial and military support. 141. As a result of the continued direct and indirect economic, fmancial, political, diplomatic and military assistance from the NATO member countries, Portug~ persistently refuses to implement United Nations resolutions and wages with greater intensity its COlOnid WwJ of genocide against the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and 147. Resolution 2395 (XXIII) condemns the violations by the Government of Portugal of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of independent African States. 142. In the Territories under its control Portugal discourages all attempts at self-determination on the part of its subjects. It does so in defiance of the many United Nations resolutions and in complete disregard of the proposal put forward by African Heads of States and Governments and adopted by the General Assembly in 1969. That historic document, known as the Lusaka Manifesto on Southern Africa, calls for a peaceful transfer of power to the peoples of these colonial Territories. Instead, Portugal has chosen to intensify its military operations against the peoples and has resorted to the indiscriminate bombing of civilians, making use of napalm and chemical weapons as well as a scorchedearth policy to defoliate trees and bushes. Napalm, as the Council is aware, derives its effectiveness essentially from its fierce casualty-producing properties and its psychological impact on its victims. Since,man possesses an inbred fear of fire, napalm and chemical weapons tend to unnerve him to an extent which other forms of attack may not. While from a military point of view this may provide the users with a decided advantage over their armed opponents, it puts at a tremendous disadvantage the civilian or non-oombatant population in the localities in which it is used. 148. Resolution 2918 (XXVII), adopted yesterday by the General Assembly, on a recommendation from the Fourth Committee, calls upon Member States to give “all moral and material” assistance to the liberation movements that have been carrying on the liberation struggle in the Portuguese African Territories. Premier Caetano is reported to have retorted that any negotiations would amount to “sacrilege”. This is reported in ?%e New York Times of today, f 5 November 1972. 149. Even at the level of the Security Council, concern has on a number of occasions been expressed for the well-being of the inhabitants of these Territories. Resolution 163 (1961) called upon Portugal to act in accordance with General Aslembly resolutions 1514 (XV) and 1603 (XV). 150. In resolution 180 (1963) the Council took cognizance of the whole question relating to Territories under Portugal’s administration and affirmed that the policies of that State in claiming its colonies as “ ‘overseas territories’ and as integral parts of metropolitan Portugal are contrary to the principles of the Charter”. It also requested all States to refrain from offering that Government any assistance which would enable it to continue its acts of repression on the peoples of those Territories. 143. My delegation is irrefutably convinced that the African Territories under Portugal’s rule do not constitute an integral part of metropolitan Portugal. They are to all intents and purposes Non-Self-Governing Territories within the meaning of Chapter XI of the United Nations Charter. That being the case it stands beyond any shadow of doubt that it is Portugal’s duty under the Charter: 151. This affirmation was repeated in resolution 218 (1965) when the Council once again called on Portugal to grant independence to its colonies in accordance with resolution 15 14 (XV) and in resolution 312 (1972) the Council called upon all States: . . . to promote to the utmost . . . the well-being of the inhabitants of these Territories and . , . to develop selfgovernment, to take due account of the . . , aspirations of the peoples and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions”. ‘I “ . . . to refrain forthwith from offering the Portuguese Government any assistance which would enable it to continue its repression of the peoples of the Territories under its administration, and to take all the necessary measures to prevent the sale and supply of arms and military equipment to the Portuguese Government for this purpose, including the sale and shipment of equipment and materials for the manufacture and maintenance of arms and ammunition to be used in the Territories under Portuguese administration”. 144. In accordance with the provisions of resolution 1514 (Xv), Portugal should help transfer all powers to these peoples, without any conditions or reservations, on the basis of their freely expressed will and desire, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom. 152. This is a catalogue of resolutions adopted either by the Security Council or the Gene@ Assembly over the years and giving direction as to the steps colonial Powers, particularly Portugal, should adopt in order to divest themselves of their colonial charges. Portugal has consistently flouted the decisions of the United Nations. 145. The continued refusal of Portugal to recognize the legitimate aspirations of the peoples of these Territories for self-deteimination constitutes a permanent source of international friction and a constant threat to international peace. Resolution 1742 (XVI) dealing with the situation in 6‘ . . . all peoples have the right to self-determination and independence and that the subjection of the peoples to alien domination constitutes a serious impediment to the maintenance of international peace and security and the development of peaceful relations among nations”. It also declared: ‘6 ..a the further continuation of colonialism in all its forms and manifestations a crime which constitutes a violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and the principles of international law”. 154. My delegation notes with great interest the achievements of the Special Mission in making a tour of the liberated areas of Guinea (Bissau) to validate the claims of the PAIGC that huge sections of that Territory are under their undisputed control. Even though Portugal maintains a large garrison in the Territory the PAIGC and the peoples of that Territory have literally cordoned off a large part which remains inaccessible to the Portuguese. 155. Portugal, on the other hand, has in its usual manner circulated a letter contained in document A/C.4/753 of 30 October 1972, attempting to discredit the report of the Special Mission. We know from experience that this approach is typical of the Portuguese Government. They refuse to accept the facts of a situation even when they are confronted with such facts. During our membership in the Security Council we have been witness to this type of blatant denial which in the end turned out to be true. We therefore find it difficult to believe their official explanation on a number of situations. 156. Is there any further proof needed of Portugal’s disrespect for the United Nations and the Security Council? Portugal should be made to understand that it is not in Africa and that the Territories it holds onto by sheer force are colonies in accordance with resolution 1514 (XV), that it must put an end to the myth it has propagated over the years of these colonies being integral parts of metropolitan Portugal. It will also have to face the reality of the present world situation, instead of wallowing in far-fetched notions of its grandeur and the civilizing role it thinks it has been called upon to play in Africa. It is for the peoples of these colonies to decide, after adequate preparation, whether they would prefer to join with Portugal in an association of some kind or other after their political emancipation-not before. My delegation is willing to give Portugal an opportunity to come to terms with the owners of the Territories it occupies. If it fails to accept this offer, then it will have only itself to blame for the grave consequences that will result. 158. As I said when addressing the General Assembly on 10 October 1972, if the inhabitants really like Portugal, if they have all along been thinking that they are Portuguese assimilados, then they will immediately enter into all sorts of bilateral treaties with Portugal. The international community will then be satisfied that the new relationship is not one of colonial master and subjugated servants, but an association of free and independent States. If, however, Portugal continues its intransigence and refuses to negotiate, then we implore the Security Council to conclude that by its action Portugal is threatening international peace and security. 159. In such an eventuality, my delegation, together with our other African brothers and comrades from the other continents, would have no option but to press for the imposition of sanctions against Portugal. Even though we expect that good sense will prevail, we would also appeal to the Security Council to set up an ad hoc committee to be continuously seized of this matter. 160. The united voice of Africa is also calling on the friends of Portugal, without whose assistance Portugal would have been unable to continue its colonial wars, to listen to reason and desist from perpetuating these wars through such assistance. For when history comes to be written and condemns Portugal for what has happened in Africa, Portugal’s friends will also be condemned for they have, willingly or not, contributed to all the human suffering and indignity that the African in those Territories has had to bear. 161. Portugal ought to review its stand on the colonial issue. It is lucky that the leaders of the liberation movements are in favour of and ready for negotiations. The overwhelming vote in the General Assembly yesterday in favour of the resolution calling for negotiations on the Portuguese Territories indicates one thing and one thing only: namely, that the time is now right for such negotiations. Procrastination may be disastrous. That is why we called for this meeting. That is why we have come here. We believe that now is the time to act, for as Shakespeare said: “There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; Omitted, all the voyage of their life Is bound in shallows and in miseries.” On such a full sea is Portugal now afloat, and she must take the current when it serves, or lose her ventures.

1 thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Sierra Leone for

Madam President, permit me to express to you my most sincere felicitations upon your assumption of the presidency of the Council for the current month. As the first woman ever to have the unique opportunity of presiding over the Security Council you have enhanced your own personal and professional credentials, already impressive by their excellence. As a celebrated daughter of the Republic of Guinea you have also given Africa a reason for justifiable joy and pride. I have no doubt that with your wisdom and wealth of experience, you will discharge your responsibility of presiding over the work of this august body with singular distinction. 170. Yet the Council must also re-examine its own conscience and discover whether, as the guardian of international peace and security, it has truly discharged its responsibilities towards the long-suffering inhabitants of the Portuguese colonies. 171. A few years have elapsed since the Security Council was directly seized of the question of the Territories under Portuguese domination. Most of the resolutions that have been adopted by the Council in recent years have emanated not so much from any substantive consideration by the Council of the problem of Portuguese colonialism in Africa as from the numerous complaints that were brought before it by a number of African States whose sovereignty and territorial integrity were violated by Portugal in the course of prosecuting its colonial wars of repression against the peoples of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) and Cape Verde. 165. A tribute is also due to Mr. Louis de Guiringaud, representative of France, for his excellent performance as President of the Council during the past month. 166. I now wish to express my gratitude to the Council for having given me the opportunity to address it in my capacity as the current Chairman of the African Group at the United Nations. 172. In view of the intensified struggle of resistance and a liberation being waged against Portuguese colonialism by the African peoples in those Territories, I submit that the Council indeed has the responsibility of giving earnest consideration to the progressively deteriorating situation prevailing in the Portuguese colonies. This responsibility of the Council was underlined by His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie I, my august Sovereign, when he addressed the Council at its African meetings held in Addis Ababa last January, and I quote: 167. In January 1962 I had occasion to speak in a plenary meeting of the General Assembly, on the problem of Portuguese colonialism relating to Angola.Qs At that time I spoke as the representative of Ethiopia. Today, 10 years later, I am privileged to address the Security Council on the same problem on behalf of the African Group at the United Nations. It is therefore with a feeling of personal sadness that I recall the events of the last 10 years in the African Territories under Portuguese domination. “The developments of the last few years in southern Africa confirm beyond reasonable doubt that, as repression has increased, it has also created more resistance, thus leaving in its wake an escalating process of violence, which may soon engulf the whole area. Indivisible as peace has become in our time, there is the obvious danger that such a process will have far-reaching consequences. The Security Council has, therefore, the duty not only to forestall this tragedy but, by taking effective and timely action, to remove the danger.” f 1627th meeting, para. 9.1 168. I feel sad because the Interval between my first statement in the General Assembly and my present address I to the Council has not influenced the Government of Lisbon towards a change for the better in its African colonies. The record shows quite the reverse. The Portuguese Government has remained obdurate in its refusal to discharge its obligations under the Charter. It continues to flout the decisions of the principal organs of the United Nations. Oblivious to the inexorable tide of change throughout the subjugated areas of the world, all that Portuguese colonialism has managed to accomplish in the Iast 10 years is the intensification of its ruthless oppression and repression of the peoples in its African colonies. This is indeed a very sad and gloomy record. 173. Our present submission is, therefore, nothing less than that the Council must act now, and act effectively. 174. On 15 December 1960 the General Assembly adopted resolution 1542 (XV), which determined that the Territories under Portuguese administration were Non-Self- Governing Territories within the meaning of Chapter XI of the Charter of the United Nations. That decision, under the terms of Article 73 of the Charter, placed upon Portugal, as the administering Power, the obligation to promote to the utmost the well-being of the peoples in the Territories concerned, and, to that end, infer al& to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples of those Territories and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions. 169. The last 10 years have also yielded a different kind of harvest. As Portuguese oppression and repression have intensified, so has the resistance by the nationalists in its colonies-so much so that Portugal is now compelled to wage a colonial war in Africa. I trust that the Security Council appreciates the fact that the patriots who are carrying on the battle in the Portuguese colonies are not only fighting for their national freedom and dignity but 23 Ibid., Sixteenth Session, Plenav Meetings, 1097th meeting. 176. Portugal has ever since continued to remain a victim of its own illusions, clinging to the reminiscences of its ancient Lusitanian empire, thus guided by such an outmoded concept of its own nationhood. 177. The implication of the Portuguese rejection of the United Nations position regarding the status of the Territories under its domination and of its own erroneous conception of man’s overpowering quest for freedom has been the undisguised resort to a blind rejection of the right of the peoples under its subjugation to self-determination and independence. The upshot of the extreme divergence of perception between the Portuguese dream of perpetual domination and exploitation over its African colonies, on the one hand, and the inexorable quest of those colonized by it for self-determination and independence, on the other, has led to an armed conflict. 178. The policy statements made at different times by spokesmen of the Government in Lisbon are particularly instructive, in that Portugal has no intention of voluntarily relinquishing its African colonies. For example, in an address to the District Committees of the National Action Movement on 27 September 1970, Prime Minister Caetano dramatically explained why the so-called “overseas provinces” must be defended at all costs. He said: “I believe that they form a precious patrimony of the homeland, and I consider that a nation loses its own character when it denies its own past. But if only history were at stake, then my position would not be so firm as it is, for history is being made day by day, and whatever national imperatives demand shall be done is done, whether it links up with the past or not.” 179. The last part of the extract I have just quoted reveals Portuguese intentions in unmistakable terms when Prime Minister Caetano says that “whatever national imperatives demand shall be done is done, whether it links up with the past or not .” 180. And then he goes on to state that the effort in Africa is linked with preserving the Christian/Western tradition in that land. 18 1. The imperatives demanded at the present time are, we submit, nothing less than a war of extermination within its colonies and premeditated aggression against the independent African States neighbouring them. We can but “Immediate steps shall be taken in Trust and Non-Self- Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete hidependence and freedom”. ! 188. While we are gratified to note that since the adoption of that important Declaration it has been possible for some 30; Territories to achieve their independence, we cannot hide our deep disappointment at the continued refusal of Portugal to grant to some 15 million inhabitants of the African Territories under its colonial domination the right to self-determination and independence, Needless to state, of course, that the repeated calls made on the Portuguese Government by the United Nations to abandon its policy of colonial subjugation and denial of the rights of millions of persons to determine their own political destiny have gone unheeded. In fact, the Portuguese Government has seen fit to intensify its armed repression against the defenceIess civilian populations in Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau) and Cape Verde and is simultaneously waging three brutal wars against the liberation movements in the colonies, which have been compelled to take up arms not only to defend themselves and their peoples from indiscriminate Portuguese atrocities but also to liberate their motherland from Portuguese colonialism and win the freedom which Portugal has vowed to deny them. 184. I need hardly recount to the Council the repeated acts of aggression committed by Portugal against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a number of African States that border the African Territories under its domination. The facts are in the records of the Council. As far back as November 1965 the Security Council declared that the situation resulting from Portugal’s policies both a~ regards the African populations of its colonies and the neighbouring States “seriously disturbs international peace arrd security”. And the numerous requests the Council has made to Portugal to refrain from such acts of aggression against African States continue to be defied by Port%al with impunity. Only a month ago Portugal openly admitted to the United Nations that the regular forces of its colonial army in Guinea (Bissau) had indeed violated Senegal’s frontier and attacked a post in Nianao, Senegal. BY its 185. Portugal’s behaviour in the United Nations over the past decade, as exemplified in its non-compliance with the decisions of both the General Assembly and the Security Council, provides ample evidence of the contempt with which it holds the authority of the United Nations and of its intention to continue to disregard the obligations it has assumed under the Charter. Portugal has further accentuated its defiance of the United Nations by the close ,alliance it has forged with the regimes of Pretoria and Salisbury. The notorious role Portugal is playing in rendering ineffective the sanctions imposed by the Security Council on Southern Rhodesia is so glaring that it does not require any elaboration. “We repeat that we are for dialogue, but heretofore the Portuguese Government wanted to have only the dialogue of arms. We repeat that we are ready to negotiate at any time. We should be very grateful to the Security Council if it could help us in that field.” [163&d meeting, para. 81.1 186. Yet, in spite of the display of such gross misconduct, Portugal continues to benefit from the support it receives from its friends and allies within and outside NATO. Obviously, given the under-developed condition of Portugal, it would not have been in a position to dispatch, thousands of miles away from Portugal, over 150,000 troops and an assortment of modern paraphernalia of warfare to prosecute colonial wars that cost it over $200 million per annum without the huge economic as well as military assistance it receives from such support. If the Portuguese arm of oppression continues to be strengthened by an influx of such assistance, we maintain that it will not be induced to change its attitude regarding the fundamental and paramount question of self-determination for the peoples under its colonial domination. It goes without saying that the stronger and less isolated Portugal feels, the less inclined it will be to give up its colonial possessions. 190. This spirit of conciliation is also shared by the other liberation movements in both Angola and Mozambique. We therefore believe that further attempts should be made by the Security Council to call upon Portugal to accept this gesture of goodwill and magnanimity extended to it by the very people it has been long persecuting and exploiting. We have no doubt that if Portugal were to accept the realities of the modern era and respond to the aspirations of the peoples of its colonial Territories, not only would an immediate end be brought to the wanton killings and destruction that have been going on for far too long, but Portugal would earn the respect of international public opinion and regain its proper place in the community of nations. 187, The history of the last 10 years of the armed struggle in the Portuguese colonies has shown that the nationalist forces in those Territories, far from being decimated by the campaign of repression that is being waged by Portugal, are making substantial progress in liberating large areas formerly under Portuguese control. The national liberation movements in those Territories are not only fighting against the Portuguese forces but are also engaged in programmes of national reconstruction-building schools, health centres and other infrastructures of development within the areas already liberated. These facts have been witnessed by the members of the United Nations Special Mission which visited the liberated areas of Guinea (Bissau) in April this year. One need only look at the report submitted by this Mission. 191. The United Nations Special Committee of Twenty- Four on decolonization took an important decision last April when it recognized the ,liberation movement of Guinea (Bissau) and Cape Verde, the PAIGC, as the sole and authentic representative of the people of the Territory. By approving the report of the Special Committee last week, the General Assembly has in effect endorsed the PAIGC, and not Portugal, as the true representative of the people of the Territory. Furthermore, the General Assembly only yesterday took yet another landmark decision in the history of the United Nations efforts in the field of decolonization when, by an overwhelming majority, it adopted resolution 2918 (XXVII), which affnmed, inter a&, that “the national liberation movements of Angola, Guinea (Bissau) and Cape Verde and Mozambique are the authentic representatives of the true aspirations of the peoples of those Territories.” We believe that this decision is justified as, in our view, it is the liberation movements and not Portugal which are the legitimate representatives of the peoples in the Territories under Portuguese domination. 188. The successes so far achieved by the national liberation movements in their resistance against Portuguese colonial repression have not been without a price. In its frustration over its inability to defeat the forces of liberation, Portugal has resorted to the use of chemical substances and defoliants over and above its indiscriminate bombings of unarmed and innocent civilians. Its repedted and heightened aggressions against those African States that border its colonies is also closely linked to its failure to reverse the momentum generated by the liberation struggle inside the colonies. Thus Portugal is increasingly becoming 192. For its part, the Security Council, by resolution 312 (1972) of 4 February 1972, has recognized the legit- 193. We also believe that it is time for the Security Council to consider declaring an arms embargo against Portugal, because its aggressive activities have for long threatened peace and stability in the African continent. Unless effective measures are taken promptly, the flow of armaments into the colonies will continue unabated. This, in turn, will aggravate the already tense situation prevailing in the continent. 194. Since the ultimate objective of the United Nations in the sphere of decolonization coincides with that of the liberation struggle, which is, after all, the final eradication of the last vestiges of colonialism, we believe that it is only appropriate for the Security Council to throw its full weight behind a request to the international community to give effective moral and material assistance to the national liberation movements in the Territories under Portuguese domination. 19.5. The African peoples who today languish under Portuguese colonial oppression cannot be accused by any stretch of the imagination of having been too impatient in their desire to exercise their right to self-determination and independence. Over a decade has elapsed since the wave of independence swept the African continent. Nevertheless, for those still under the yoke of Portuguese colonial domination today, the lofty principles of human dignity, equality and freedom enunciated in the Charter of the United Nations are nothing more than unfulfilled promises since all they know in this day and age is not freedom and dignity but only enslavement and oppression. 196. The United Nations has for long recognized ,the plight of colonial peoples and, within its own limitations, has been attempting to help them. Of the repeated United Nations demands to Portugal to end its colonial wars in Africa, Prime Minister Caetano says: “In the incredible campaign waged against us, the main centre of which is the United Nations General Assembly, there seems to be no alternative but to follow the advice of the old saw: ‘Pay no heed to reckless words’.” In the light of this categoric declaration, need we ask any questions about Portuguese intentions regarding the future status of its colonies? 197. It is no wonder then that, being so convinced of Portugal’s intransigence in its determination to continue to dominate them, those under its oppression have resolved to resist. Surely, in all fairness, we cannot fail to appreciate their disappointments and frustrations at remaining the last of the victims of colonialism. It is for this reason that we feel that the Council has the moral duty to mob&e assistance on their behalf in order to enable them to wage their just struggle for freedom. 198. Only too often has the United Nations been accused by its detractors of compromising the very principles of its 199. The Council may well consider that these accusations are not entirely unfounded or unjustified. That the lesson of this unenviable situation has not been lost in some quarters is succinctly expressed by Mr. Caetano, Prime Minister of Portugal. With characteristic frankness, he asserts: “What are we to think of an organization like the sad, wretched United Nations which, on celebrating its twenty-fifth birthday, can boast of not having solved a single serious problem of international affairs of all those that have arisen during that quarter of a century. , . .” He goes on to list selectively some of the problems which the United Nations has allegedly failed to solve. Only his list does not include the problem of Portuguese colonialism. 200. Need one ask who is being taken to task by the pronouncements such as the one I have just quoted? As the primary organ responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security, evidently the target of Caetano’s derision is none other than this Council. The Council may, therefore, appreciate that when we plead with the Council that it take effective action against Portuguese colonialism, we do so only because all other peaceful approaches have been tried and proved to be of no avail. 201. Nor is this all. Portugal has repeatedly questioned the authority, efficacy and credibility of the principal organs of the United Nations. The time for action by the Council has, in our view, been long overdue. We therefore plead with the Council, once again, that it take up Portugal’s incessant challenge and discharge with distinction its responsibilities under the Charter by promptly taking effective action against Portuguese colonialism along the lines we have suggested.

I thank the representative of Ethiopia for the kind words he was so good as to address to me. 203. I have just received a letter from the representative of Saudi Arabia, who requests, under Article 31 of the Charter, that he be allowed to participate in the debate on the item before the Council. If I hear no objection, I shall propose, in accordance with the practice of the Council and the provisions of the provisional rules of procedure, to invite the representative of Saudi Arabia to participate in our debate. 204. There being no objection, it is so decided, and 1 invite the representative of Saudi Arabia to be seated at the Council table and to make his statement. 205. I call on the representative of Italy, on a Point of order. 207, As far as I understand it, Mr. Baroody-I may not have noticed him-was not in this chamber during all these statements, and perhaps he would profit from reading them tomorrow in the verbatim record. That would make his statement a little more interesting. Furthermore, I should like to say that our physical strength has some limits, and I for one must confess that my capacity of concentration has been much weakened. So in order that we can profit to the greatest extent from the statement which Mr. Baroody has in mind to give us, I would suggest that he should postpone his statement until tomorrow so that I personally can concentrate on what he is going to say and try to draw the greatest profit from that contribution. I should like to suggest this to you, Madam President, and perhaps Mr. Baroody would be kind enough to have some compassion on his colleagues around the table, and speak to us tomorrow. 2 13, The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): I am glad to announce to the Council that the Vice-President of FRELIMO is prepared to yield his turn to speak, and that he will address the Council at the beginning of tomorrow’s meeting. This being so, and if the Council has no objection, I shall invite the representative of Saudi Arabia to be seated at the Council table.

I will not object, but will welcome Mr. Baroody to address the Council.

I associate myself with the words of my good friend Mr. Nur Elmi. We welcome Mr. Baroody and we rely on his promise that he will be brief.

I thank you for your co-operation. I now call on Mr. Baroody to make his statement. 208. Furthermore, I understand that there is another speaker on the list before Mr. Baroody. For my part, I would be ready to stay half an hour longer to listen to that speaker who has been in the chamber, who has followed all the statements which have been made, and thus perhaps follow a logical order of business in the Council. At the invitation of the President, Mr. J. Baroody (Suudi Arabia} took a place at the Security Council table. 217. Mr, BAROODY (Saudi Arabia): Thank God for the presence of a lady in the Chair of the Council.

I thank the representative of Italy and I understand his concern very well, However, we have had consultations, and I cannot now deprive the representative of Saudi Arabia of the opportunity of saying what he wishes unless the Council objects. Is it a formal objection on the part of the representative of Italy? 218. Madam President, I am indeed exhilarated to take the floor at a time when the “first lady ever”-and hailing from the continent of Africa too-has assumed the responsibility of presiding over the deliberations of the Security Council. We look upon you, Madam, not only as a capable representative of your country in this and in past sessions, but also as a mother who, without any doubt, extends humanitarianism not solely to members of her immediate family but also to youth all over the world; for I am sure you identify your own children with the generation which is rapidly succeeding our own. We have a sacred duty to that generation because we should endeavour hopefully to do our utmost to pave the way for a lasting peace in a world that is still torn asunder by policies that, unfortunately, quite often serve the petty national interests of States.

I was only making a suggestion, an appeal, on the basis of humane reasons. Perhaps Mr. Baroody will heed this appeal and have some understanding and show some compassion on his colleagues. 211 I The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): May I in turn appeal to the representative of Italy, because we have already appealed to the representative of Saudi Arabia and he has promised to be brief. Could I ask the representative of Italy to be good enough to let us hear what Mr. Baroody has to say? 219. As the President of the Security Council, Madam, I respect you, but to you as a mother I can pay no higher tribute than by quoting an ancient Arabic proverb which, paraphrased in English, would read: “Paradise is wherever the feet of a mother tread”. 2 12. Mr. NUR ELMI (Somalia): Like the representative of Italy, I have great admiration for Mr. Baroody and I am sure that we shall ail benefit from his intervention in this 221, Parenthetically, I. would like to thank both Mr. Vinci and my good brother from Somalia for granting me pcrmission to speak before the Council. But I would like to recall for their benefit that the Council many a timr: met ut 9 o’clock on certain questions and did nut ;rdjourn until after 3 o’clock in the morning. But when Baroody ;rsks for the floor, of course, thanks to their friendship for m.:, the) ask me to commiserate with them. Why do they not show non-discririlillatiori and ask their other friends trl ct~mmiserate with them when they take the floor for three of four hours? I say that with no criticism wf their %~9~~~ill, but I hope next time they will be a little more generous with me. 222. Freedom in the Portuguese overseas Territories is the subject with which we are confronted. This item shrntld not be considered as an African item, I should tell my friend from Somalia and every other African. It should not be considered an African item as such-with all due respect ttr the sponsors, who hail exclusively from the States of the Organization of African Unity. The item of the I+trtul;ucsc Territories should preoccupy every State Memhcr CI~ the United Nations without exception, not only because nf the fact that the liberation of those Africans who are still ruled by an alien Government should be enjoined upon the international community, but atso because the stuhts qtru may create more friction between Western countries and the African people at large, and that friction may lead to suppression and eventually to bloody conflict, all of which should be prevented by the United Nations in its third decade. Otherwise, untold suffering and economic setbacks will be visited not only upon the Africans but upon the Portuguese themselves and upon their allies as well. 223. I have taken the liberty of speaking at an early stage of this debate beause I thougflt I might be in a position to offer a few suggestions that may give members of the Council, including my good friend Mr. Vinci, some food for thought as to how to proceed with this question. He referred to me as a veteran, but he prefers the formalistic approach to any item rather than the substantive -at least he gave me that impression. “It is all arranged that we should hear ‘this gentleman or that gentleman”. Why do they not address such a remark to other members of the Cauncil? Some of the ideas I shall express may not be popular with some of my African colleagues and, I am sure, will be quite objectionable to the Portuguese, but I have to be frmk, What we need in the Council is some innovation, some new concepta, lest we find ourselves again.--and again and again-in a rut, producing nothing more than all sorts of resolutions that will be ignored, sometimes even before they are circulated. ?‘$ -I.. NO dollbt SWlC ~mmm?nt and rotating members ef titt! Council will chide Portugal, not to say reprove er ClWie~ltll it, ftrr IlaG observing the injunctions of the Security (“ouneil. But thcru will be no confrontation, I assure y#I, between the Western powers and the socialist, African, Asian and other States which decry what Portugal is doing? which censure it for not relinquishing its rule ever its African Territories. 2.?h. ht US be frank with ourselves :md refrain from basing pious hrlpes t)fl the VWS cast by those Powers which cohort the African Stetes to Ilerscverc- .and sometjmes aat includes ml owu State. We da SO without e&en&g effective aid. We call it moral support. Moral support is important, but we have seen what little impact it canhave on peoples struggling for self-determination, unless those peuplcs have enough weapons to overthrow the rulers from abroad. 237. It might be asked what is the alternative. Of course, nnc might say the African peoples can pool their resources with those of other peoples-. perhaps peoples of Asia or Latin America, or the socialist countries-and wage war against the Portuguese in their overseas Territories, Or the African States may thcrnselvrs unify their efforts and wage war against Portugal in Africa. 22R. But the moment we say that we shall find many pcoplc raising their voices here in the United Nations, to ask: “Is this permissible in the United Nations, when we are dealing with the non-use of force in international relations, when we arc dealing with the question of perhaps holding a conference on disarmament? ” 2‘29. No member of the Security Council dare say, “Let US arm the African States, or smuggle arms”--as was once done in Algeria and has been done in other countries strugi#a!Z for their liberation, No one would dare show his face ia the United Nations were he to make suc11 a proposal. ._ 230. But these things could be done surreptitiouslYI clandestinely. How do we know? We have many cases to cite -.Palcstinc, Korea, Vict-Nam, the Congo. Certain States sent arms to those countries, and with what result? The result was untold suffering for the peoples of those territories. 231, And they are still sending arms. Although we hear Of a cease&e, both sides in Vict*Nam, brothers, are killing one another. And so-&cd messengers of Peac’+pseudoexperts-have been shuttling to and fro without anY effect+ 232. What is there to prevent the so-called Portuguese overseas Territories from becoming the arena of warfare? And who would pay the price? Those who suPPlied them 237. Finally, we should all pray for another great leader and statesman like de Gaulle, who saw the facts as they obtained in Algeria and would say that if the Africans living in Portuguese Territories did not want to be part of Portugal, they should be allowed that choice. But until that happens-and we have no assurance that a de Gaulle-one of the few statesmen who have emerged in this century-can emerge again, then the alternative will be a helpless United Nations and a struggle waged, like that of Viet-Nam, outside the United Nations, if not tomorrow, if not in five years, then in 10 years. But time passes quickly. 233. I must congratulate the African representatives who submitted the joint letter upon the instructions of their Covemments. It is written in straightforward and dignified terms. In particular, the last paragraph does not engage in censuring Portugal or casting aspersions, I will read part of it: ‘< 8 *. to bring the Government of Portugal to recognize the right of self-determination and independence of the African peoples under its domination, and draw up a time-table for the transfer of power to the authentic representatives of the African peoples of Guinea (Bissau), Angola and Mozambique and thus put an end to the senseless war”-1 emphasize the words “the senseless war”--(‘and the anachronistic colonial domination.” 238. Is this the legacy that the Security Council and the United Nations should leave to the next generation? That is the question. It may be said that those circles in Portugal are very strong, that they dominate the economy of Portugal and that the overseas Territories are necessary for maintaining the economy of Portugal. Can nothing be done? Of course something can be done if there is good will. We have an Arabic proverb that says-and I am not using it here in a derisive or derogatory manner-“the sheep should not perish but at the same time the wolf should not go hungry”. Those who have vested interests are the wolves; they should not devour the whole sheep, the people. If we can find a formula within the framework of the United Nations by seeing to it not that those vested interests of Portugal are eliminated overnight but that there is a community of interest between the liberated Africans in those Territories and the Portuguese, we may see a glimmer of hope on the horizon. 234. In contrast, we have the letter, derisive in its terms, written by our colleague from Portugal /S/10833]. It is an insult to the intelligence not only of the Members of the United Nations but of his own people to refer to “the overseas portion of Portugal’s national territory”. I used to address my colleagues from France during the Algerian crisis when they followed the same line of reasoning-that qlgeria was a dipartement de la France, a part of France-and ask them, “Is it across the Seine? ” There was a whole Mediterranean separating Algeria from France. And there is a whole Mediterranean and a Sahara separating the so-called Portuguese territories from Portugal. 239. But they say, “Once they are independent they wiIl nationalize, as many others have done.” This can be taken care of because the African people, having had such long experience with Portugal, know it would not be in their interests to suppress the Portuguese and have them supplanted by another alien people which would come and exploit them. 235. The Portuguese people is a docile people, a lovely people; I have met many of them. I have friends among them. But is it the Portuguese people which is waging a struggle to suppress the African peoples? I submit that it is only a small circle of vested interests which unfortunately happen to be behind the Government; without them perhaps the Government would topple; and the Government is forced to maintain its domination over those overseas Territories. 240. Therefore, the hour being late, and, as I have said, in spite of the fact that people have taken the floor at midnight and nobody has objected, but in sympathy with my colleagues Mr. Vinci of Italy and the representative of Somalia who made an appeal, which in the interests of the African people I did not heed, I conclude. I do not have to be formalistic and listen again to every Tom, Dick and Harry, whether they come from the United States, Africa, Asia or anywhere before I can make myself understood. I have some ideas that I have culled from my personal experience and not from history, although I am a humble student of history and can adduce what has happened in history in recent times to bolster my arguments. Either war or a formula. The Africans will be excused if they have to resort to war, which is most objectionable and most deplorable and which is to be condemned. But if they have no other recourse, what can they do? 236. Now I should like to address myself to our colleague from Portugal, if he is in the chamber. And I hope he will heed my warning, which is not gathered from books -though history should have taught us many lessons-but from personal experience gained since I was a youth involved in a national struggle. It is a friendly warning, because we do not want-while you, Madam President, a mother, are in the Chair-to treat him as if he were our enemy of our adversary. He is our brother, as are the Africans or any colleague from any other country. We are all brothers under the skin, anyway. What is the alterantive? If the African people-and when I say “African people” I mean African States and those struggling for their 242. Why not reactivate the Trusteeship Council? Why not ask our Secretary-General to do as he has wisely done in sending an emissary to South Africa to deal with the question of Namibia? Why not initiate something that may pave the way to establish forthwith an understanding between the Africans and the Portuguese so that they may communicate and negotiate? In the long run there is no way out of giving their freedom to the Africans living in Portuguese Territories. We do not expect it to be done overnight, but we have seen what good work tho Trustccship Council has done. At least we would avoid the mistake we made on the question of Palestine in 1947 when many of us accepted Palestine’s being placed under the Trustccship Cauncil until we could find a way out as between the Jews who ulme from abroad and settled in Palestine and the Palestinian people. But the major Powers then precipitated a vote and partitioned Palestine and we are still seized of the question of Palestine, a tragedy in our midst which may perhaps one day prove to be a tinderbox because of the influence of certain Zionists in the world. 243. Why should we not learn from our mistakes of the past? Why not appeal again to Portugal to accept ad emissary of the Secretary-General who would go on a fact-finding tour? The answer would be “No, because these Territories are part and parcel of Portugal”, and that answer would be an insult to our intelligence, 244. Madam President, I have notes for a longer speech, but commiserating again with my good friend Mr. Vinci, and my brother, the representative of Somalia, I am going to assure them that I shall not read those notes tonight, I shall still have occasion to take the floor. Their remarks are already forgotten. I know an ancient proverb which says: “Anyone takes issue with you if he likes you; if he does not 2~3 Ib& Tiventwwnfh Se&m, Annexes, qcnde item 92, document Al0791 and Add,l, 245. I shall have another occasion t0 expatiate on SOme ideas, with the sole intention of trying at this late stageof my service in the United Nations to contribute my little bit hOl)inls, that Wf.31 If It may be a small spark, it may perhap; be considered OS a giimmcr of hope on the horizon, 3%. Ttle PRESIDENT {interpretorion from &en&): ~~~ 1 thank Mr. Baroody for the praise he was good enoughto bestow not only on the President of the Security Council for the month of November, but also on myself as a mother.

I just want to make a very brief remark to the effect that I would be most unhappy to find in tomorrow’s records that the delegation of Somalia was opposed to having Mr. Baroody of Saudi Arabia address the Security Council. That WG absolutely not my intea. tion, I think that there is some slight misunderstanding, AU I wanted to say--and I regret that I have not been clear t%WUgh--Was that W-Z should first hear the Vice-President of FRELIMO, Mr. dos Santos, address the Council to give hia, priority, so that the medX?rS of the Council would have direct information with regard to the Territories under consideration. Then, if there were other speakers-begin. ning with Mr+ Baroody---we could have proceeded with the debate, 248. I never suggested an adjournment, Although I under stfind fully the remarks of Mr, Baroody, which were friendly, I just wanted to make this point very clear, 249, The PRESIDENT (interpret&ion from French): I call on the representative of Saudi Arabia.

1 said that earlier incident has already been forgotten, and that I feel that my brother from Somalia is over=sensitive about what I said* With regard to the appeal, although it was made with au sincerity, the interpretation of it-not by me but by others”.,was an implied objection, and they asked meto speak tomorrow. I mean by “they”, at least my good friend vlr, Vinci. I had been approached, inter alia by YOUI Madam President, as to whether I could speak tomorrow0 But I had my reasons for not speaking tomorrow. 251. With regard to the priorities, there are n0 Priorities here amongst members. Do our three colleagues from Africa who preceded me have priority just because they are African? I said that this question should occupy all Of usj regardless of whether we are Africans or not, because it is a question of selfedetermination of a people. 252. In conncxion with the representative Of the African movement, I had a chat with him and he never told me that he would have preferred to speak before me. It is not a question of priority. If I had to make mY remarks tomorrow, I could not appear at the Council meeting in the morning and I wanted to put forward a few ideas before many Africans spoke, so that I could get them across not only to them but to my colleague from Portugal. The meeting rose at 7.40 p.m. BOW 3’0 OBTAIN UNWKD NATIONS PWWCATIONS JAtho in United Nntloru, Nmw York Pdco: SU.3. I.50 (of equivalent In other curranch) 72.82241-January 1976-J19as