S/PV.1902 Security Council

In accordance with the decisions adopted earlier [190&h and 1901st meetings], I shall invite the representative of Angola to take a place at the Council table and the representatives of Cuba, Egypt, the German Democratic Republic, Guinea, Kenya, Madagascar, Nigeria, Poland, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Yugoslavia and Zambia to take the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Luvualu (Angola) took a place at the Security Council table and Mr. Alar&n (Cuba), Mr. Abdel Meguid (Egypt), Mr. Neugebauer (German Democratic Republic), Mrs. Jeanne Martin Cisse’ (Guinea), Mr. Maina (Kenya), .Mr. Rabetafika (Madagascar), Mr. Harriman (Nigeria), Mr. Jaroszek (Poland), Mr. Blyden (Sierra Leone), Mr. Hussen (Somalia), Mr. Petri6 (Yugoslavia) and Mr. Kamana (Zambia) took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber.

I should like to inform the Council that I have just received letters from the representatives of India and the United Republic of Cameroon in which they ask to be invited, under Article 31 of the Charter, to participate without the right to vote in the Council’s debate. If I hear no objections, I propose, in accordance with the Council’s practice and rule 37 of the provisional rules of procedure, to invite these representatives to participate without the right to vote in the Council’s debate. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Jaipal (India) and Mr. Oyono (United Republic of Cameroon), took the places reserved for them at the side of the Council chamber.

The first speaker is the representative of Poland, whom I invite to take a place at the Council table and to address the Council.

Mr. President, the delegation of Poland is grateful both to you and to the other members of the Council for enabling us to present our country’s position on the issue under consideration. Your successful tenure as President of the Council reinforces our conviction that this time too the debate will contribute to the furthering of peace and justice for yet another victim of aggression on the African continent. 5. I would also join those delegations which have extended their sincere welcome to the new Permanent Representative of the United States, Ambassador Scranton. At the same time, we truly miss at this table a man of unusual talents, experience and devotion to the cause of the United Nations, Ambassador Malik, who, because of a very unfortunate accident, has to stay away temporarily from our deliberations. The Polish delegation is looking forward to seeing him very soon in our midst. 6. In deciding‘ to participate inthis debate, Poland has been guided by the genuine considerations of “In solidarity with progressive and democratic movements, our party... extends its warm support to the People’s Republic of Angola and to all nations fighting against imperialist aggression and intervention, for freedom, sovereignty and democracy.“t 7. In the course of its entire 30 years as a Member of the United Nations, Poland has spared no efforts to implement in practice those lofty objectives. Likewise, the United Nations has played an outstanding role in the decolonization process, inspired as it was by the initiatives and untiring efforts of the socialist community and other progressive countries. I need only mention the adoption of the epoch-making Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, due, as is well known, to the initiative of the Soviet Union. 8. One of the decisive measures for the final eradication of colonialism was the advent of independence in the former Portuguese colonies. Still fresh in our memories is the struggle, both in the United Nations and outside it, against the oppressive Salazar regime for the freedom of the peoples of Mozambique, Guinea- Bissau, Cape Verde and Angola. The records of the United Nations are full of telling information as to who were the real friends of the peoples of those territories, unreservedly supporting their just struggle for independence, and who actually obstructed the attempts to speed up the decolonization process. One has no difliculty in discerning them even now, for in the context of the question of the former Portuguese colonies, sirens’ voices can still be heard today. One of the staunchest enemies of Angola and other former colonial territories on the African continent has always been the South African regime. We have condemned it in the past; we continue resolutely to condemn it today. 9. Thanks to the vigilance and unremitting efforts of the Organization of African Unity, this series of meetings of the Council has been convened to discuss and draw proper conclusions from an open armed aggression by South Africa against one of the youngest independent States of the world, officially recognized by the overwhelming majority of Member States. 10. The just struggle of the Angolan people for its national liberation had for long been a source of constant imitation to the world’s ‘most reactionary circles, acting in collusion with the forces .of Angola’s domestic reaction. The entire progressive world welcomed the most authentic victory of the people of Angola over forces of aggression and bands of foreign mercenaries. Is it not symptomatic that, when all other means of intervention and aggression failed, the forces of reaction had recourse to their last resort, 11. In spite of its criminal actions, the Pretoria regime has the impudence to try to justify its aggression against the People’s Republic of Angola by the argument of the so-called protection of its interests. To us in Poland arguments like this indeed have a familiar and sinister sound, which we know from our not-too-distant experiences. In 1939 the Hitler regime also saw fit to launch an aggression in the name of the protection of its usurped interests. Its final outcome took a toll of nearly 60 million human lives. 12. That is one of the reasons why we share the prevailing view that South Africa’s action against independent Angola represents a threat to international peace and security. It is all the more conspicuous an aggression since, as already pointed out by a number of representatives of African States, South Africa does not border on Angola. To invade the young Republic it used a territory which does not belong to it, a territory whose national unity and integrity it has violated in the pursuit of its expansionist practices. Especially in this context, the conditions for withdrawal spelled out in South Africa’s letter to the’ Secretary-General of 21 March [S/12019] are totally illegal, unjustified and groundless. 13. Already, on 28 January [1882nd meeting], I said in this very Council that today it is the People’s Republic of Angola that the South African regime has chosen to invade from the illegally occupied Territory of Namibia, and tomorrow it may be any other country of the continent. This warning has not lost its validity, especially today, when South Africa’s twin regime in Southern Rhodesia, one of the last bastions of racism and colonialism, makes frantic efforts to prevent itself falling apart under the pressure of the people of Zimbabwe, of liberated States of Africa and of the progressive forces all over the world. 14. The fact that South Africa has been compelled to take steps to withdraw from Angola represents a great victory for the Angolan people and for all the free States of Africa, supported by the socialist countries and all progressive forces of the world. Their joint action forced the Pretoria regime to take the longoverdue step. Indeed, we conceive of it also as an illustration of a certain effectiveness in the efforts of the United Nations, which should now do its utmost to consolidate the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the young Republic of Angola. 15. Poland has always lent its active support and assistance to the peoples fighting for their freedom and independence. By the same token, we have supported the People’s Republic of Angola in defending and 16. We realize at the same time that more concerted action of the world community is called for to contain aggression and racism. That is why we give our full support to the postulates put forward by the representative of People’s Republic of Angola, Ambassador Luvualu, in his statement in the Council on 26 March [290&h ‘meeting]. I take this opportunity warmly to welcome the representative of free and independent Angola and to express the gratification of the Polish delegation over this important contribution to the Council’s debate. We look forward to seeing the People’s Republic of Angola as a full Member of the United Nations in the near future. 17. I have concentrated in my statement strictly on the question under consideration, that is, the aggression by South Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola. I think that the desire expressed by the African Group, including the representative of Angola, to keep this important debate free from extraneous considerations, is well-founded and absolutely right. That is why my delegation cannot fail to express its regret, and indeed its indignation, over an isolated attempt to distort facts on the issue before us. In so doing the representative of one of the permanent members of the Council, notorious for his slanderous attacks against the Soviet Union, even went so far as to try to justify the aggression by the racist Pretoria regime against the people of Angola. No amount of abusive rhetoric can deny that that is an objective fact. 18. As far as my delegation is concerned, we are confident that the free African States, united as they are in their common struggle against colonialism, racism and apartheid, are perfectly able to judge the facts for themselves and to draw their own conclusions.

The next speaker is the representative of Somalia. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and --~- to make his statement.

Mr. President, let me first of all express my satisfaction at the fact that this important debate is taking place under your capable guidance. In the course of this month when many crucial issues have come before the Security Council, you have shown those qualities of wisdom and impartiality so necessary for the conduct of affairs in this body. 21. I wish to thank the members of the Council for having granted my delegation’s request to participate in the debate on the question of South African aggression in Angola. This is a matter which, in the view of my Government, touches directly on the peace and 22. I am glad that the Government of Angola found it possible to send one of its distinguished representatives, Ambassador Pascal Luvualu, to address the Council and put before it the facts relating to the complaint against South Africa. No one who heard his statement could have failed to be concerned about the gravity of the acts committed by South Africa against Angola, acts which involved criminal and wanton outrages against the Angolan population and which constituted serious violations of international law. 23. Non-interference in the internal affairs of each country and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States are among the most fundamental of the principles governing relations among nations. Most regrettably, those principles have been seriously violated by the Pretoria regime’s aggression against Angola. South Africa’s hostility to the Angolan people and their revolutionary cause is not new. It is well known that throughout the period of the liberation * struggle, South Africa used its wealth and military strength, in collaboration with the colonial Power, to attempt to suppress and frustrate the legitimate aspirations of the Angolan people. As we know, that attempt failed in the end, but from the time of the AIvor agreements between,the Angolan people and the Portuguese Government in January 1975, South Africa has waged a campaign of subversion in order to impede progress towards independence. That subversion reached a climax with the invasion of Angola by South African troops at the beginning of August 1975, under the pretext that their action had the consent of the Portuguese authorities. As we are now aware from the correspondence circulated to the Council, that was not the case. The purpose was to overthrow the people’s revolution and to establish an authority which would be amenable to South Africa’s policies. 24. During the seven months when South Africa maintained a presence in Angola, it not only carried out a ruthless military campaign against the national liberation forces but inflicted untold suffering on the civilian population. The’ representative of Angola has described how his country-a new State in need of international solidarity and support-was pillaged, its people assaulted, its property destroyed, its vital installations wantonly wrecked by the South African forces in a “scorched earth” policy following their defeat on the battlefield. Such actions demand the most severe condemnation of the Security Council as well as of the international community, and simple justice calls for full compensation from the South African Government for the losses sustained by the Angolan Government and people. 25. It is a sad commentary on our times, as the representative of Angola has pointed out, that countries which could have had a positive influence on the 26. It was this situation which impelled my country, along with other members of the Organization of African Unity, to insist that a question of such grave import should come under the close scrutiny of the Security Council. The United Nations must be particularly concerned with the aggression against Angola since it was launched from the Territory of Namibia, for which it legally holds international responsibility. 27. Much has been said by South Africa and States sharing close relations with that country to the effect that the situation has eased with the withdrawal of South African forces to Namibia. But the peace of the area will continue to be in jeopardy unless South Africa is made to withdraw its forces and, indeed, its illegal administration from Namibia as well. 28. In my delegation’s view the Security Council must denounce in the strongest terms South Africa’s armed aggression against Angola and the violation of its territorial integrity. Secondly, it must firmly reject the notion that South Africa had the right to take military action against a sovereign State in order to safeguard certain hydroelectric installations in which it purportedly had an interest. It is quite clear that South Africa’s occupation of the area of the dam was illegal and, therefore, was an open aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Govemment and the people of Angola. A failure to condemn South Africa on this score would have the effect of establishing a most dangerous precedent in intemational relations. It would mean that a State which might claim economic interests, real or otherwise, in another State could, if it sees those interests thereatened, secure their protection by a forced military presence. To admit such a thesis would bring about international anarchy. 29. In my delegation’s view, the question of the disposition of the-benefits of the dam on both sides of the border with Namibia is one which concerns only -and I emphasize “only’‘-Angola and an independent Namibian people, as quite correctly stated by the Political Bureau of the MPLA [Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola] in its statement issued in Luanda on 20 March. 30. South Africa’s aggression against Angola cannot be treated as an isolated incident or one that is unlikely to recur. The interrelationship of southern African problems is recognized by South Africa as much as by the international community. South Africa, itself the 3 1. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from French): The next speaker is the representative of Cuba. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

Mr. President, at the very outset I should like to thank you and, through you, the other members of the Council for this opportunity to participate in this important debate. It is a special pleasure for us to attend this debate because it is taking place under your worthy and able presidency. It is .a good-. thing indeed that a debate of such importance for the complete liberation of Africa should take place under the leadership of the eminent representative of Benin, whose Government and people have been fighting in the vanguard of the struggle against colonialism and racism. That has deep significance; it is a reminder to the imperialists,’ colonialists and racists that the period of slavery and serfdom will never return. We are all the more pleased because there are firm bonds of friendship and fraternal co-operation between your country and mine which are based on our common devotion to the cause of the complete emancipation of all oppressed peoples. 33. I am also pleased to extend my best wishes to the delegation of the courageous people of Angola. Its presence here is an honour to all of us. It represents a people in the vanguard of the struggle for freedom, a people that has been able to withstand every test, a, people that was able to draw strength from its suffering and that, guided by its firm, heroic battleproven vanguard, fought consistently until victory. That delegation’s statement at the beginning of this debate has, I believe, been particularly enlightening to all the members of the Council. 34. The Angolan‘people has fought a long and selfless struggle for independence and freedom. Its ‘martyrs have been numerous and its sacrifices untold; its inspiring feats have filled a history of struggle over. five centuries. Few people in the world have shed so much blood and made so many sacrifices in trying to win the right to determine their own future. 35. From the emergence of European colonialism to this day, the Angolan people have had to fight, with 36. There were five centuries of stubborn resistance. The chroniclesof the Portuguese and South African historians speak of the struggles of the Angolans ever since the day when the European oppressors fust set foot on their shores. There were many who escaped slavery by seeking refuge in the forests, which, centuries later, would be the bases for the contemporary revolutionary struggle. It is not by chance that the slave traders called the Angolans rebels unwilling to bow to the harsh discipline of their masters. Their rebellious spirit, which was always evident in the uprisings of the slaves in the plantations of colonial Cuba, constituted one of the principal factors in the creation of the Cuban nation. 37. Ever since its foundation in 1956, the MPLA has most worthily represented the highest aspirations of the Angolan people, indeed of all the peoples of Africa which are not prepared to continue to be subjected to the ruinous voracity of the foreign capitalists. Inspired by the example of Amflcar Cabral and by the heroism of their founders and under the enlightened, consistent guidance of their President, Comrade Agostinho Neto, the MPLA was the only Angolan organization which fought for independence and freedom, the only one which unflinchingly fought the colonialists and their lackeys, the only organization which was able to mobilize the exploited masses, reared them in the heat of the struggle and prepared them for building a new Angola, totally free and independent. There were many vicissitudes and undescribable difficulties which the MPLA had to overcome during the 15 years of armed struggle. 38. Although they had been ferociously repressed by the colonialists ever since the glorious uprising of February 1961, although their militants were massacred throughout the country, although they later confronted the colonial army which enjoyed the active collaboration of the imperialists and racists and their African servants and had to face untold logistical difficulties arising from Angola’s geographical location at a time when the balance of power in the area favoured the reactionary forces, the fighters. of FAPLA [Popular Armed Forces of Liberation] continued to be the standard bearers of armed struggle. Alone, they 39. During the two decades of struggle which began in February 1961, neither the Angolan people nor their Portuguese oppressors were alone. They both enjoyed the active support of their allies from abroad. The socialist countries, the African peoples and all the progressive forces helped the MPLA in its unequal struggle. The imperialists, the racists and all the reactionaries and traitors stood actively together with Portugal in its efforts to annihilate the MPLA. 40. The South Africa racists never concealed their greedy intentions against the Angolan people. In Pretoria’s strategy, the other African countries were always considered as potential vassals, especially those which were located in areas close to the realm of apartheid. Hence, they gave open support to the Portuguese during the colonial war. Hence the plans to convert the economies of Angola and Mozambique into subsidiaries of the monopolies of the South Africans and their imperialist allies. Plans to develop hydroelectric plants along the borders of the territories were conceived as part of an attempt to expand white colonialism in Rhodesia and Namibia and to increase the exploitation of the people and strengthen the system of apartheid. 41. Pretoria’s collaboration with the Portuguese fascists in all areas is very well known. I might mention that in 1968 the MPLA denounced the presence of South African officers and soldiers who were fighting along with the Portuguese in the southeastern part of Angola. In the midst of the liberation war, Comrade Agostinho Neto, the President of the MPLA, drew the attention of the world to the external support which colonialists were receiving: “We know that recently South Africa has been providing officers and soldiers to fight in the southeastern part of the country against our forces. “For the South African racists, the development of the war in Angola and its effect on South West Africa is a source of constant concern. On a number of occasions they have declared that their borders have to be defended in Angola and Mozambique “They, with the Portuguese, are carrying out bombings and machine-gun attacks from helicopters. Recently, they set up a base in Angolan territory, near the border of South West Africa, which will be operated by Portuguese and by South African soldiers.” 42. The reaction of the South African authorities to the irrepressible advance of the liberation movement in Africa in recent years should consequently come as a surprise to no one. Pretoria tried to extend its system of domination and racial subjection, and that is why its rulers were seized with anger when the growing struggle of the African movements in the territories oppressed by Portugal drew near to the hour of liberation and brought about the defeat of fascism in Lisbon. The borders of freedom were coming too close to the principal bastion of racism and apartheid in Africa. The victory of the MPLA and the subsequent establishment in Angola of a genuinely African Government, independent and progressive and standing together with the oppressed peoples of southern Africa, and the creation in Angola of a revolutionary State which would serve as an example and an inspiration for millions of Africans were a threatening reality which made the racists in Pretoria lose a good deal of sleep. 43. That is why South Africa launched its shameless and criminal aggression against the Angoian people, in a desperate attempt to wrest complete victory from the MPLA fighters who had been struggling for 20 years with unparalleled selflessness. The aggressive designs of the South Africans went hand in hand with those of their imperialist allies and partners. The CIA [Central Inrelligence Agency] of the United States in fact distributed millions of dollars to its salaried workers in FLNA [National Front for the Liberation of Angola] and UNITA [National Union for the Total Independence of Angola] to enable them to commit all kinds of misdeeds and mischief against the Angolan people. The racist colonialism organized ryactionary armies to frustrate genuine independence. 44. It was in those circumstances that early in August last year-quite unjustifiably and in violation of all international principles and standards-South African armed forces crossed the border of Namibia, occupied a large part of southern Angola and, in fragile collusion with bands of Angolan traitors, began its armed intervention in what was still a territory under Portuguese administration. That is a secret to no one. The Portuguese Government protested against that invasion by South African troops. The Permanent Representative of Portugal repeated that denunciation in the plenary meeting of the General Assembly on 21 November.* It would be a good thing if the imperialists and their accomplices who wish to falsify the facts and ignore who the aggressor was in Angola, who 45. Between August and October .the imperialist interference continued at an ever-growing rate. Its purpose was obvious: to seize Luanda and control the vital centres of the country before independence was declared on 11 November. Agents of the CIA, white mercenaries and puppet troops intervened at the side of South Africans. 46. It was not until October that Cuba sent its first instructors to Angola. When they arrived, the imperialists, the South Africans and their lackeys had already been shamelessly intervening in the country for many months. 47. On 23 October, in an attempt to deal a death blow to the Angolan revolution, there was a massive invasion by South African troops, which, using between 100 and 150 tanks and advancing 60 to 70 kilometres a day, marched on the capital of Angola, while in the north the mercenaries were only 25 kilometres from Luanda. In the face of that treacherous attack by the racists, on 5 November, at the request of MPLA, the Revolutionary Government of Cuba decided to send the first military unit to Angola: 48. For Cuba, to give assistance to that fraternal people, victim of the combined aggression of imperialists, racists and mercenaries, and to contribute to the defence of its national independence was simply to fulfil an elementary duty of solidarity. For the Cubans it has been an honour to wage that battle together with the heroic soldiers of the Angolan national army and the fighters of other African nations that have also stood in the, vanguard of the struggle against colonialism. If our action has been of any assistance, however modest, in the victory of the Angolan revolutionaries, and ifit has therefore aroused the wrath of the imperialists and racists, we can only feel pride and satisfaction. 49. I feel obliged to make some comments on the statement delivered here last Friday by Ambassador Huang Hua [290&h meeting]. I shall comment only on that part of his speech that related directly to South Africa’s aggression against Angola. Thus, my observations on the statement by the representative of China will tie in with the continuation of my statement, ‘which is directly related to. the item at present before the Council. Seemingly, nothing obliged Ambassador Huang Hua to come to the first in this ‘series of Council meetings in order to justify the South African aggression against the people of Angola and come to the defence of imperialism with regard to the future steps it might take in the attempt to save the racist regimes in Africa. But that is in fact what he did three days ago in the Security Council, before the entire world. :. . when the victorv of the national liberation struggle in Angola was won, the Soviet .social-” .. imperialists crossed the oceans, committed naked armed intervention and plunged the newly independent young State of Angola into painful division and civil war. The South African racist regime... also openly carried out armed aggression against Angola and directly interfered in its internal affairs.” [Ibid., para. 55.1 ‘6 55.’ Thereb%&&ve of China-referred on a number of occasions to the Cuban internationalist combatants fighting together with the Angolan patriots, calling them ‘.‘mercenaries’*. One has the impression that he was trying to be insulting. Of course, we would be insulted if the word came from a revolutionary, but that is not the case. 56. I have already said that Cuba gave the People’s Republic of Angola military assistance, which was requested by its legitimate Government, precisely to confront the aggression on the part of South Africa troops, Portuguese fascists and international mercenaries. Of course, Ambassador Huang Hua said not one word about-the real mercenaries, the paid assassins with long criminal experience in the Congo, Nigeria, _,_._ --.. Rhodesia’ and other African countries, w.ho participated in the South African aggression. That was not by accident. Later on I shall explain why such discretion was exercised with regard to the white mercenaries participating in the aggression against Angola, The Council will then understand why the representative of China preferred to omit any reference to this matter. 51. The Chinese leadership knows that that is not true. It knows also that that statement is an attempt to justify what cannot be justified. It knows that with those words it has gone further than the imperialists, indeed it has gone even further than the racists in Pretoria, in defending the South African invasion of Angola. When the South Africans attacked Angola in August last year, Portugal, the administering Power, protested and denounced the aggression. Neither Portugal nor South Africa nor anyone else went so far as to say that there was any other foreign country intervening in Angola with its armed forces. 52. In another part of his statement Ambassador Huang Hua said: 6‘ . . . what merits further attention is that to contend with the other super-Power for world hegemony, the super-Power which flaunts the flag of socialism pushes feverishly its colonial policy of expansion and scrambles for strategically important places in southern Africa. Such a frenzied offensive by Soviet social-imperialism is bound to bring extremely serious consequences to Angola, southern Africa and even the whole African continent.” [Zbid.] 57. I should add that Cubans were not the only ones to faht on the side of the People’s Republic of Angola; we were honoured to fight shoulder to shoulder with combatants from other African countries, all under the command of the legitimate Angolan authorities. 58. There is something that should not be overlooked in the statement by the Chinese representative: he tried to convey the impression that the People’s Republic of Angola did not f%ht Sought African aggression. According to him, “mercenaries’* -meaning Cubans and nationals of other African countries-fought on its behalf “under the leadership of the Soviets’*. I categorically reject the racist, anti- African overtone.of that assertion. To him, the Angolan resistance over five centuries means nothing; MPLA’s armed struggle of more than 15 years means nothing: In his racist, chauvinist vision he is incapable of understanding that it was they, the Angolans, fighting heroically and with determination, courage and selflessness, who won the independence of their country: first against the Portuguese, later against the South Africans. That African victory is precisely what gives a singular historic dimension to the War in Angola. It has shown that African combatants are capable of confronting and defeating the racists. It has shattered the myths propagated by the defenders of white supremacy. It .has demonstrated that nothing and no one can prevent -the -.complete liberation of Africa. ‘It has ‘proved that the African people can resist and fight till final victory. To feign to ignore this or to try to conceal the profound significance which the victory 53. There are many other parts of the statement by the representative of China which are similar to the ones I have quoted. 54. I invite representatives to compare what I have just quoted with recent statements by distinguished spokesmen of imperialism who, concerned about the fate of the racist minority regimes in southern Africa, have uttered words very similar to those used by the representative of China. It is also worth pointing out that they coincide with the adoption by the Pretoria Parliament of certain amendments to the Defence Act which would allow South Africa to attack any African country. Ambassador Huang Hua did not find time to condemn those South African threats against African countries, but he did hasten to justify in advance any further South African aggression, using, indeed, the same arguments and the same language used by the proponents of apartheid. I have with me the records of the South African Parliament containing the debate which took place before the amendments to the Defence Act were adopted. These records are available to any representative who wishes to indulge 59. I said that I would explain why the representative of China was so discreet about the foreign mercenaries who have sown death and destruction on Angolan soil. The reason is very simple: here it is, in these photographs and documents which I have brought to the Council. These photographs were found by FAPLA troops in the city of Carmona, which was the centre of the activities of the band known as FLNA, created and financed by the CIA. They depict Chinese advisers who were acting together with the bandits of the CIA. Also found in Carmona by FAPLA was this document, which contains the records of two meetings of the FLNA chiefs, in which one can see their links and those of another secessionist group with the South African troops. 60. Ambassador Huang Hua will probably be tempted to reject this evidence, since it was captured by the Angolan patriotic forces and presented by them to public opinion. In that case, however, perhaps the following bit of evidence will be more convincing to him and to the members of the Council. I am referring to a magazine published here in the United States under the suggestive title of Soldier of Fortune-The Journal of Professional Adventurers. On the cover, in full colour, as representatives can see, there is the photograph of a mercenary operating on Angolan soil. You can see the flames that are destroying something which is hardly Soviet sophisticated weaponry, but clearly the humble dwellings and crops of Angolan peasants. Inside the magazine there is a report by a South African newspaperman, written, according to him, last summer, a few months before the declaration of Angola’s independence. It is accompanied by a number of photographs, in which you can see grouped together South Africans, Portuguese and Rhodesian fascists, white mercenaries and Chinese advisers. They have many different weapons, too, including South African and Chinese weapons. Elsewhere in the magazine, details are given on the procedures which any aspiring mercenary must follow if he wishes to join that macabre medley of aggressors. The magazine lists addresses of recruitment offtces and the names of recruitment officers. I think it would be of interest to our African colleagues to note the scandalous fact that in the United Nations host country one can freely encounter publications of this type, in which, among other things, we are told that one Neville Worthington, P.Q. Box 2773, Pretoria, South Africa, is one contact for the mobilization of mercenaries for the war in Angola; and in which, on page, 29, we are informed 61. The South African regime’s criminal aggression is responsible for the death of thousands of Angolans, for much material loss and serious damage to Angola’s economy. That regime is also guilty of the plundering, pillaging and depredations of sizable material resources by its troops on Angolan soil. 62. The Security Council must condemn South African aggression; it must demand that Pretoria put an end immediately and unconditionally to that aggression, that it withdraw all its troops from Angolan territory and that it scrupulously respect the independence, sovereignty and integrity of the People’s Republic of Angola. The false and cynical arguments of the South African Government must be rejected categorically. Pretoria has no right whatsoever to impose conditions for the withdrawal of its troops guilty of aggression; nor does it have any right to occupy the Territory ,of Namibia or to speak on behalf of its inhabitants, victims of the evil system of apartheid. The South African Government must be forced to return to Angola all the property stolen by the aggressive troops and to compensate the Angolan people for damage caused in the course of the aggression. 63. - The international community as a whole and the United Nations in particular have a duty to come to the assistance of the Angolan’people during the period of national reconstruction which is about to begin. The struggle of the Angolan people is an inseparable part of the common undertaking of the peoples of Africa, Asia and Latin America which are trying to consolidate their independence and sovereignty. In their quest for freedom, the Angolan people have made many sacrifices and they are deserving of the firmest broadest and most generous solidarity. To help the. People’s Republic of Angola is, consequently, a duty which cannot be shirked. 64. The Angolan people, in their struggle and in their victory, have made an inestimable contribution to the cause of the entire African continent and of all the oppressed peoples of the world. Their generous blood has opened up a new course to the final emancipation of the country and given hope to millions of men and women in southern Africa. Thanks to the heroic effort of the Angolan people and to the firm solidarity of the Soviet Union and all those peoples which have’ contributed to the triumph over the racists, the dawn of freedom now begins to illuminate with steady - ---.. .-- _-- gleaming the future at those contending-a2&i%t colonialism and racism. “The dawn has arrived, brother, the dawn! Look at our faces. A new morrow dawns in our old Africa. Ours alone will be the land, the water, the mighty rivers Which the poor black surrendered for thousands of years; And the dazzling light of the sun will shine once again for us, Drying the tears in our eyes and the spittle on our faces. When you break your chains, the heavy fetters The days of our suffering will be gone, never to return.” 71. The Security Council has been meeting for several days to examine the grave question of the aggression of South Africa against the very young Republic of Angola. The initiative for this meeting was taken, as we know, by the group of African ambassadors acciedited to the United Nations and acting on instructions of the Council of Ministers of the Organization of African Unity following its meetings held from 23 to 29 February at Addis Ababa. The African countries, which in spite of certain divisive manoeuvres happily doomed to failure were unstinting in their support for the Angolan people in their struggle to free themselves from five centuries of one of the most repressive and reactionary forms of colonialism, could not remain passive in the face of the fact that immediately after the acquisition of its independence Angola was threatened in its very essence by South African aggression-particularly since we are aware that the racist minority in Pretoria has always striven to stem the irresistible tide of independence and democracy in southern Africa, as if one could erect screens against the wind of liberty.

The next speaker is the representative of the United Republic of Cameroon. I invite him to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.

I should like first of all to express to you, Sir, my warmest and most fraternal congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for March. The long-standing bonds of friendship between Benin and Cameroon derive their origin not only from geography and history but also from their common passion for independence and their common determination to work together for the total liberation of Africa and the strengthening of African unity. Your wise, enlightened and militant leadership is a good augury for the success of our work. 72. It is natural, therefore, in the face of this new act of violence committed by South Africa against Angola at a decisive turning-point in its destiny, that the Security Council should rapidly examine this matter, which, incidentally, falls within the context of a whole series of provocations, defiance and violations of all kinds so characteristic of the Pretoria tigime both towards the countries of the region and towards the international community as a whole. 68. I should also like to take this opportunity to bid welcome to the new Permanent Representative of the United States, Mr. Scranton. We should like to extend to him our best wishes for success in the performance of his new task, a performance which already bears the imprint of a style to which we had become unaccustomed. 69. It is a particular pleasure for me to convey my most fraternal and cordial greetings to the representative of the People’s Republic of Angola. My country, Cameroon, supported and assisted the Angolan people in their struggle for independence. We welcomed the assumption of international sovereignty by the State of Angola with joy, and we recognized it. I take pleasure in repeating here to that country the wholehearted support of the Government of the United Republic of Cameroon in its noble task of preserving, building and strengthening the national unity to which the People’s Republic of Angola is so attached. 73. Certainly, after the Security Council had taken cognizance of this matter, and before it actually met, the racist minority tigime of Pretoria sent out many communications. It kept on invoking reasons of all kinds, even social and humanitarian reasons, to justify the presence of its troops in Angola, finally declaring its intention to withdraw them by 27 March. 74. Curiously, certain countries have been extremely sensitive-not, as we might have expected, to the grave act of aggression constituted by the violation of the territorial integrity of Angola, but rather to the promise of withdrawal of the soldiers and South African mercenaries from Angolan territory. As if this promise of withdrawal, although it seems it is being translated into fact-and in any case, who could guarantee its final and total nature, aware as we are of the sense of 70. I should also like to take this opportunity of addressing the Council for the first time; on the limited basis of rule 37 of the provision&rules of procedure; 75. For Cameroon the situation is clear. The illegal presence of South African soldiers and mercenaries in Angolan territory in the area of the Cunene is an insult not only to the prestige of the State and the dignity of.the Angolan people but also to the prestige and dignity of the whole of Africa. This violation is prejudicial to one of the essential objectives of sovereignty without which there can be no security for either the Government or the people of Angola: firm and recognized borders for its territory. 76. This grave violation of the sovereignty and tenitorial integrity of Angola dangerously increases tension and the risks of a generalized conflict in the region. No pretext, be it political, ideological or allegedly humanitarian, can justify imposing on the Angolan people the residual presence of the South African troops with which Vorster, when the struggle for power in Angola was at its most uncertain, sustained a crushing defeat in his attempt to dismember that fraternal country. 77. The Security Council must vigorously condemn the flagrant act of aggression committed by South Africa against Angola. It must also urgently call upon South Africa genuinely and unreservedly to withdraw its troops not only from Angolan territory, in order to create an atmosphere favourable to the strengthening of Angola’s efforts to consolidate its independence and national unity, but also from Namibia, which the racist minority in Pretoria has been using as a base for aggression and which it continues to occupy illegally in spite of the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice3 and numerous resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. 78. With the victory of the Angolan people under the leadership of the MPLA, South Africa and its friends must understand more than ever that the myth of the superiority of the white man,’ which is supposed to justify his domination of the black man in southern Africa, has finally been destroyed. It is belief in that myth that has engendered the serious situation of dangerous tension in southern Africa and which could lead to a generalized crisis. Persistence in this unreasonable course of a policy of humiliation against tens of millions of men, of plundering and systematic repression, obviously can only lead to further violence the outcome of which no one can predict. We cannot but deplore this because, as the President of the United Republic of Cameroon, His Excellency El Hadj Ahmadou Ahidjo, stated in submitting to the General Assembly, the Manifesto on southern Africa4-“We do not... preach violence, but rather an end to all violence, and more particularly an end the violence done to human dignity by the oppressor’ .f Africa.“s 79. Therefore we solemnly appeal to all those who through their political, economic and military support

I invite the representative of India to take a place at the Council table and to make a statement.

MY delegation is grateful to the Council for granting it th& opp&tunity to express its views on a question that is apparently of the greatest importance to the African Member States and understandably fills them with foreboding. The fact that this question was brought before the Council by the Chairman of the African Group has special significance, and we wish to demonstrate our solidarity with the African States in their constant vigilance against the expansionist aims of the racist regime in Pretoria. 82. On behalf of my country, I wish to welcome the delegation from Angola led by Ambassador Luvualu. We listened with much sympathy to his statement, and we are especially glad to hear of Angola’s interest in joining the United Nations, of its respect for the Charter and of its desire to establish relations with all friendly States on a basis of sovereign equality. We welcome also the statement of Angola in regard to its positive attitude towards Namibia and its people. 83. The question before us is the act of aggression committed by South Africa against the People’s Republic of Angola. In point of time, and even according to the Prime Minister of South Africa, this act of aggression was first perpetrated on 9 August 1975, when Portugal was administering Angola. The reason given by South Africa for entering Angola was that it was forced to do so in order to protect workers and to safeguard installations that provided certain services to Namibia. A careful examination of this socalled reason for intervention shows that it was nothing more than an excuse for expanding the territory under the illegal occupation of South Africa. 84. The massive nature of its intervention, with its regular army, tanks, guns and mortars, is proof enough of the fact that it had been carefully planned well in advance and was indeed a major military operation. It was clearly not tantamount to the sending of policemen to guard installations and workers. On the contrary, it was done without the knowledge of Portugal and was obviously designed to take full advantage of the fluid situation following the Portuguese withdrawal from Angola. It was in fact totally unrelated to the security of South Africa or the protection of Namibia. There was never any, danger either to South Africa or to Namibia or indeed to any of the installations in Angola. It is no wonder, there- 85. In retrospect it is clear now why South Africa intervened. It was to push its illegal occupation further into the newly independent State of Angola, to interfere in its internal affairs and to divide the national liberation movement in order to frustrate the attainment of Angolan independence. The racist character of the South African Government gave its intervention a malignant aspect whose repercussions were felt far and wide and went beyond the African continent. There was no doubt that this racist intervention had to be stopped at all costs. Had it been allowed to succeed, its consequences would have been intolerable to the rest of Africa. 86. South African intervention was the original sin -one that was totally inexcusable and is entirely deserving of the Council’s condemnation. It is important for the Council to ensure that there is no repetition of such intervention by South Africa either in Angola or elsewhere in Africa. 87. We have seen South African statements to the effect that South Africa has withdrawn its forces from Angola. These statements need to be verified; but that withdrawal alone would not provide adequate comfort to the people of Angola. South Africa was responsible for taking away properties belonging to Angola, for removing money from its banks and for causing damage to its roads, bridges, airports, installations and so on. These losses must be made good, and the persons who were taken away by force should be returned to Angola. Unless the United Nations takes steps to that end, South Africa will only be emboldened to intervene elsewhere, with equally disastrous consequences or worse. 88. The tragedy of Angola reminds me of the tragedy of Africa itself at the turn of the century, when it was open and free for all European countries to intervene at will. We have come a long way since then along the road to international law and order, but it is worth remembering that the old memories are still very much alive in the minds of many persons in Africa, and it is necessary that the Council reassure them. 89. The presence of South Africa in Namibia is not only illegal; it is also of the greatest menace to its neighbours. There is even less justification for the presence of the South African army in Namibia. The Council should once more call upon South Africa to vacate Namibia and to withdraw its armed forces from Namibia. It is surely the Council’s duty to ensure that the international Territory of Namibia is not used by the racist Pretoria regime to pose a permanent threat to Angola or to any other neighbouring State. My delegation hopes that the Council will not be deflected from the main purpose of the present discussion, which is to ensure the independence of

The role played by the Cuban authorities in the naked aggression carried on by the Soviet Union in Angola is known throughout the world. We are all clear in our minds as to whom the Cuban representative, Mr. Alarcon de Quesada, serves in his distortion of my statement and in his absurd and slanderous charges and fabrications against China. They are not worth anyone’s attention, nor are they worth refuting.

The representative of Cuba has asked to be allowed to speak in exercise of the right of reply. 1 invite him to take a place at the Council table and to address the Council.

I did not put any words into the mouth of the Chinese representative that did not appear in his statement last Friday [190&h meeting]. 93. With regard to the accusations he repeated here, as I said in my statement, and as everybody knows, they coincide with the campaign which the imperialists have been waging. 94. I should like to introduce one more quotation in this debate. It is not from our sources; it is from a very well-known book that has made the rounds throughout the world, Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung. The author of the prologue recommends to Chinese militants that they learn these quotations by heart and try to implement them in practice. I should like to read one of them from a work published by Chairman Mao Tse-tung on 26 May 1939: “I hold that for us it is bad if a person, a political party, an army or a school is not attacked by the enemy, because that means that it has sunk to the level of the enemy. It is good if we are attacked by the enemy, since it proves that we have drawn a clear line of demarcation between the enemy and ourselves. It is still better if the enemy attacks us wildly and paints us as utterly black and without a single virtue; it demonstrates that we have not only drawn a clear line of demarcation between the enemy and ourselves but achieved a great deal in our work.” I trust that the delegation of China will find time to study that.

There are no more speakers for this meeting. Before adjourning I should like to announce to the members of the Council that I have received from’ the President of the United Nations Council for Namibia a letter dated 29 March, the text of which reads as follows: “I wish to convev to YOU the desire of the United Nations Council for Namibia to participate in this debate without right to vote and to be represented by a delegation headed by its President and including four additional members of the Council whose names will be communicated to you shortly.” 96. The Council will recall that in the past it has addressed invitations to the representatives of the United Nations Council for Namibia when the situation in Namibia was being considered. In view of the fact that the debate now relates to a matter which profoundly affects Namibia, I would suggest that in accordance with past practice the Council address an It was so decided. The meeting rose at 6.25 p.m. Notes United Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributors throughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations. Sales Section, New York or Gene?& . ,,.. --.- .. ~.. , .“. _-. ,_ . .i COMMENT SE PROCURER LEs PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sent en vente dans les tibrairies et les agences d&ositaires du monde entier. Informer-vous auprh de votre librai= ou adresservous in : Nations Unies, Section des ventes, New York ou Genti. KAK HOJlYPWTb H3~AIiEiSl OPl-AHM 3AUHH OE’bEAETHEHHhIX HAURA mxamn 0ptGu3aqnn ~(lae&tuHeWibxx HauxR noaa~o icynsmb a xnnxcxb~x xarasnsiax n arenTcmax no ecex paftoxax rapa. HaBOnHTe cnpaBxn 06 mnaxnfm B eamex xc~nxut0~ xarfmuxe sum nmume no anpecy: Opramisamfn OCbexxxexxbIx HasxR, Cexum no npoaaxce H3~amiR, Rbw-Plopx xnx Sexesa. COMO CONSEGUIR PURLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas es& en vtnta en librerias y casas distribuidotas en todas panes de1 mundo. Cons&e a su librero o dirijase a: Naciones Unidas, Seccibn de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York __ __.. 00300 83-6086 1-Au~st 1984-2.200