S/PV.2057 Security Council

Mr. President, the delegation of Kuwait was very happy to see in New York your Commissioner for External Affairs, who took the trouble to come to this city to preside over the first meeting of the Security Council in 1978. 20. At the same time, I should like to convey to you our sincerest and most profound congratulations on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for this month, at a time when this body is once again examining such an urgent problem as that of South Africa. Nigeria is not only the largest country in Africa, but it has been among those which have been actively seeking to eliminate from the world the remnants of colonialism and apartheid and to build a new world order based on the principles of equality, justice and freedom for all nations regardless of race, colour or any of the barriers that have been erected to separate man from his fellow man. 26. The consolidation of apartheid culminated in South Africa’s bantustan or homelands policy. As a result, only 13 per cent of South Africa’s territory nominally belongs to the 18.6 million blacks, while 87 per cent is reserved for the 4.3 million whites. In the major cities, residential areas are being razed and families displaced to complete the separation of the races. 21. I should like to express our thanks and appreciation to all the members of the Council for the kind words of welcome which they extended to the delegation of Kuwait as it assumes its duty as a new member of the Council. Our response to that sincere and genuine welcome is our pledge for co-operation with them in the search for a better world. 27. The most ingenious device which South Africa has invented for continuing the usurpation of power by the minority is the system of bantustanization, which denies the black man citizenship in his own country. The black people are herded into the bantustans, which are empty tracts of the veldt, as a reserve army of cheap labour. The international community has rightly viewed the homelands policy as a cruel hoax depriving the black people of South Africa of their birthright. The homelands policy is one of divide and rule. It is a deliberate attempt by the white 22. The question of South Africa has always had a prominent place in the deliberations of the Security Council. The same is true of the General Assembly, which has been grappling with this problem since the world Organization was founded. 23. The Pretoria regime has taken the position that the policy of apartheid is essentially a matter within its 28. The Security COUIIC~I meets today to consider the question of adopting further measures against South Africa. The General Assembly has consistently taken the initiative by adopting a series of bold measures to deal with the problem. It was as early as 1962 that it adopted a resolution requesting Member States to break off diplomatic relations with South Africa, close all ports to vessels flying the South African flag and prohibit their ships from entering South African ports, boycott all South African goods and refrain from exporting goods, including arms and ammunition, to South Africa, and refuse landing and passage facilities t0 South African aircraft [resohtion 1761 (XVII)]. 29. My Government did not draw any distinction between a recommendation of the General Assembly and a binding resolution or decision of the Security Council, The Council of Ministers of Kuwait took immediate action to embody within the domestic law of our country provisions of that resolution as soon as it was adopted. 30. As early as 1962, the General Assembly asked the Security Council to take appropriate measures, including sanctions, to secure South Africa’s compliance with the resolutions of the Assembly and the Council [ibid.]. It can be clearly seen now that the rehrctance of the Council effectively to apply economic sanctions encouraged the South African Government in its independent course and defiance of the United Nations. 31. South Africa’s foreign policy and conduct have many aspects which call for a diversity of reactions. 32. South Africa is, in our view, essentially a colonial Power. Its policies are at variance with the anti-colonial movement as expressed in the achievement of independence throughout Africa. The basic internal racial features of the country, including the denial of political rights to blacks and economic exploitation, date back to colonial times. 33. South Africa is a reactionary Power that employs the most oppressive measures to repress the national movement within its territory. The massacre at SharpevilIe was a clear indication of what the Government of South Africa intended to do whenever its policies met with a measure of domestic resistance from the black majority. That unfortunate incident was a forewarning of what would follow in the form of an organized and steadfast policy of terror employed by the State to crush opposition and overcome resistance. It should also have put an end to any prospect of a peaceful evolution towards majority rule. Thenceforth, South Africa denied the most elementary human rights to the vast majority of its citizens. Resolutions of the General Assembly abound in exhortations for an end to violence against and repression of the black population and other opponents of apartheid, for the release of all persons imprisoned under arbitrary security laws and all those detained for their opposition to apnrtheid, and for thf 35. Therefore, South Africa is a garrison State with a huge war machine. It has become increasingly militant in recent years. The more it loses ground, the more militant and aggressive it becomes. A historic event of enormous magnitude took place in April 1974 and had a decisive impact on the conduct of South Africa, when the Portuguese Government at Lisbon was overthrown in a military coup that shattered one of the strongholds of colonialism and apartheid in Africa. The decolonization of Portugal’s African colonies followed, resulting in the removal of sympathetic white rulers from the buffer States of Mozambique and Angola and the exposure of the white Governments of Rhodesia and South Africa to the chill wind of African revolutionary nationalism. The cause of freedom is indivisible everywhere. Naturally, the downfall of the Portuguese colonial regime gave additional aid and support to an African upheaval of unprecedented proportions within South Africa itself. The dramatic shift in Portugal removed the buffers against the upsurge in African nationalism. Portuguese protection of South Africa’s flanks was gone and, in its place, movements dedicated to African nationalism were coming to power. South Africa saw in the Portuguese changes a reflection of its own destiny. This would account for South Africa’s unsuccessful military intervention in Angola, the escalating guerrilla wars on the Rhodesian and Namibian borders and South Africa’s repeated attacks on its African neighbours. 36. It can thus be seen that these endemic problems, which have agitated the international community for the past three decades, are all the outcome of the immutability of South Africa’s racial policies, around which all the other problems ultimately turn. 37. The Security Council is in duty bound to meet periodically to review the situation in South Africa and to see what further measures should be adopted against the racist regime at Pretoria. The Council has before it today a review of developments in South Africa since the adoption of resolution 4 17 (1977) [see S/12536]. The review clearly states that South Africa has rejected the said resolution, as usual on the grounds that the subject falls within the purview of its domestic policies. 38. SO long as South Africa refuses to abolish the policy of bantustanization, to abandon the policy of apartheid and to ensure majority rule based on justice and equality, it will continue to wage a war of terror against the African people and the nationalist movement. 39. South Africa’s oppressive measures are now applied against white persons who, on humane, moral and other grounds, object to its apartheid policy. One of the victims 40. The review contained in document S/12536 gives a lucid account of developments in South Africa that must prompt the Council to take further action. The Council has already taken a bold step in adopting resolution 418 (1977) which imposed an arms embargo on South Africa. As a new member of the Council, my delegation does not wish to start by charting a whole course of action for the Council, especially as it is meeting now to review recent developments and to listen to witnesses. However, I should like to assure the Council that my Government supports drastic measures under Chapter VII of the Charter against the Pretoria rhgirne to compel it to abolish its policy of bantustanization, to abandon its policy of apartheid and to ensure majority rule based on justice and equality.

Mr. President, let me congratulate you, first of all, on the election of Nigeria to the Security Council and on your own assumption of the important office of President for this month. Nigeria has been one of the foremost supporters of the cause of liberation on our continent, and it is therefore particularly fitting that its representative should be presiding over our deliberations as we take up the item of South Africa once again. As a brother African, I look forward to working with you during the coming year, and I know that your qualities of leadership, patience and wisdom will help us greatly in carrying out our responsibilities in conformity with the requirements of the Charter. 42. I should also like to welcome the other new members-Gabon, Kuwait, Bolivia and Czechoslovakia-who are joining us now. Their representatives all have distinguished records of service to their countries, and I am sure that they will make an important contribution to the work of the Council. 43. I should like to add that my Government is particularly happy to welcome the representative of Gabon to the Council. At the time it was elected to the Council, Gabon also assumed the presidency of the Organization of African Unity, and Ambassador N’Dong will therefore speak with added authority here. His presence in the Council will help us immeasurably with our work. 44. I am particularly happy that the seat on my right, which was occupied last year by my beloved African brother, Mr, Kikhia of Libya, is now occupied by my brother, Mr. Bishara of Kuwait, with whom I have had a very long and friendly personal relationship. 46. There is no point in our discussing here the evils of apartheid. We are all aware of the nature of the racist regime that exists in South Africa today. The matter has been discussed at the United Nations again and again, in all its details and in all its horror. One might even say that we have become too familiar with the history of inhumanity, terror, violence and oppression in South Africa. I say “too familiar” because we have heard the same stories and the same words so many times that we seem to have become inured to their meaning. We seem unable to comprehend and to feel the cries of pain and suffering. 47. Why do I say that? For the simple reason that, when we come down to it, we do very little to help those who are brutalized and oppressed, the vast majority of the South African people. Cynics will say that this is nai’ve, that in a world of nation States and modern power one cannot expect anything else. This is, of course, nothing but cynicism, a defence against the tension between the knowledge of what is right and the feeling of impotence. Feelings of impotence are exactly that. They arc subjective. They do not, in these matters, measure objective facts but rather moral sensitivity, humanity, courage and individual resolve. Cynicism, therefore, is not really worth taking seriously. It cannot, by its nature, be a philosophy of life. It is a philosophy of surrender. 48. I am not at all ashamed to say, therefore, that the Charter of the United Nations means something. The ideals enshrined in it are not mere verbiage, It is proof enough to point out that the cynics refer to it whenever it suits their own narrow purposes, The world community has been using the principles of the Charter for 32 years in an effort to build a more just and rational international order. Progress has been very slow, but progress there has been. The Charter is alive, and, under the Charter, the United Nations has accumulated a unique set of obligations to the people of South Africa. It is obligated to take action that will help to end the system of apartheid and not to make speeches as an end in itself. The Security Council recognized this fact when it instituted a mandatory arms embargo against South Africa a few weeks ago under Chapter VII of the Charter. 49. The difficulty we confront here today, the difficulty we have confronted repeatedly in the Council, is that as a collective entity we are unwilling to take the action that is obviously called for by circumstances. Consequently we go round and round in circles when the question of South Africa comes up. We make the same speeches and utter the same denunciations of apartheid. By doing this, we make this Council inhuman. We show that, although we hear the 5 1, Our obligations are, therefore, very clear. The problem now is to determine what kinds of action the United Nations can take at this juncture which will put significant pressure on the Vorster regime. In the view of my delegation, four things need to be done in the near future. 52. First, effective machinery must be created to ensure that the mandatory arms embargo against South Africa will be properly implemented. A first step has been taken in this direction, but much more needs to be done. At the present moment, the “policing” of the embargo is really in the hands of individual States. This is not a satisfactory situation, A number of separate investigations have now shown that the voluntary arms embargo called for by the Council in 1963 was never effective. It was systematically violated by a number of States, with the consequence that South Africa was able to acquire large quantities of modem weapons and military equipment even after 1963. The Council must take measures to ensure that the United Nations will be able to carry out this task independently. The Secretariat must be given adequate staff and funds to comiuct its own investigations, to study the organization of the world arms trade and to alert world opinion to viclations of the embargo. If proper machinery to do these things is not created within the Organization, then resolution 418 (1977) could become practically meaningless. 53. Secondly, it is clear that the Council can and should proceed to order an oil embargo against South Africa. Extensive research in the past two years has shown that South Africa has failed to implement the mandatory sanctions ordered a decade ago against Southern Rhodesia. The five major oil companies operating in South Africa have been allowed to ship oil and oil products steadily to the Smith regime. In fact, supplies seem to have suffered only minor interruptions over the 12 years since the unilateral declaration of independence. Thus South Africa has conspired to frustrate United Nations efforts to impose sanctions on the renegade Smith regime in an almost blatant way. Now that the facts have come to light, something must be done about it. The next logical step is to impose oil sanctions against South Africa as long as it refuses to ensure the cessation of shipments to Southern Rhodesia. 54. Thirdly, the Council should proceed to invoke economic sarMions against South Africa under Chapter VII of the Charter. It is well known that South Africa is now more dependent than ever on foreign loans and foreign direct 55. Foreign trade is also of great importance to South Africa. That country now imports some $8 billion or $9 billion worth of goods each year. This is the equivalent of roughly 25 per cent of the gross domestic product. It is clear, therefore, that economic sanctions, even if they were imposed by stages, would have devastating consequences for South Africa. Economic sanctions are now the single most important lever available to the outside world for exerting pressure on the Pretoria regime. 56. Fourthly, the Council must make certain that adequate machinery is created in the Secretariat to ensure the implementation of economic sanctions. That would be an enormous and complex task, requiring a significant expansion of staff in the Secretariat. It might be necessary to create something like an entirely new division, responsible to the Council. Procedures would have to be devised to ensure that the work of gathering and analysing information would be able to proceed without hindrance. 57. I think that many delegations-and not just those of the African Group-agree that those things need to be done and that they need to be done in the very near future. We all know, however, that there is one seemingly insuperable obstacle to our taking decisions of that kind. The major Western Powers do not believe that the time is ripe for such measures. Furthermore, they have the power of veto in the Council. They have exercised it in the past and they can be expected to exercise it in the future. 58. In passing, in this context I wish to express my appreciation for some measures being taken by Canada. It is withdrawing all Canadian trade commissioners from South Africa, which wiII lead, inter alia, to the closing of the Consulate General at Johannesburg. Under the Export and Development Corporation-which is something like the United States Export-Import Bank-Canada is terminating government-supported commercial activities in terms of export credits, investments and insurances. Canada will soon require visas of all South Africans for entry into Canada. Canada is examining its capacity to renounce the Commonwealth Tariff Preference for South Africa. Canada is considering further measures in relation to developments in South Africa and the region. Those measures are very encouraging and we cannot but appreciate them. 60. The main argument which is being used these days is that change in South Africa can be brought about peacefully. We all hope so. C. L. Sulzberger quoted the views of a prominent Western ambassador on the matter in The New York Times of 16 November 1977. The ambassador was quoted as saying: “Large-scale fighting [in. South Africa] is not in the cards for at least ten years. It is important for us to use this coming decade to promote peaceful changes there. We must use our diplomatic and economic power to accomplish this.” The ambassador later added in his interview: ‘&We must serve our own interests. . . by insisting on stability, order and progress”. 61. Frankly, it is difficult to see any historical, political or human logic in that argument. First, it is clear that such a view of the possibilities in the present situation is entirely unrealistic. We have been hearing about “peaceful changes” in South Africa for years. The Pretoria regime is, however, clearly not interested in changes of any kind. Everything that has happened in recent months indicates that the South African regime is becoming more and more intransigent: it is arming to the teeth, it is eliminating almost every imaginable semblance of free speech, and political dissidents are being gaoled and tortured. In short, the South African State is exerting ever tighter control. Where is the political space in South Africa within which people can work for real change? It is apparent to most of us that there is none. 62. Furthermore, what kind of “changes” is the ambassador talking about? The people of South Africa are clear that they want an end to apartheid. They know, and most of us know, that that inevitably means the dismantling of the economic and social system which now exists in South Africa. It is that system that we have all been working to end. “Stability and order” in South Africa may be in the interests of certain Powers; they are not what South Africans want now, “Stability and order” to the great majority of South Africans mean oppression and violence. “Progress” for them means breaking up the “order” which currently exists. To link all those words together in the South African context is to engage in the most cynical word play. It makes those words meaningless. 63. In addition, by what right do outside Powers assert that they “must use” their diplomatic and economic power to preserve or construct a particular kind of social order in a country like South Africa? Is that not the height of arrogance? Surely, the task of reconstructing South Africa when apartheid has been dismantled is something which must be left to the people of that country. Has the principle of sovereignty been thrown out of the window with the growth of transnational corporations? 64. Finally, one must note a strange implication in that argument. The ambassador stated that large-scale fighting 65. I feel bound to say that that kind of argument, which we hear so often today, seems to be nothing more than a rationalization for delay in taking effective action against the present regime in South Africa. There is no rhyme or reason to those arguments. When one probes their meaning, one finds one contradiction after another. 66. There is however no mystery about the reason for those empty pronouncements. They are made by Powers which take the view that they have vital interests in South Africa which will be threatened if the present social order is destroyed. They take the view that they must protect their investments, that they must have access to adequate supplies of raw materials and cheap labour, and that they must be sure that a “friendly Power” is in control to ensure the “freedom of the sea lanes around the Cape”. These Powers no longer hesitate to say that they are “concerned” about the intentions of those who will eventually take power in South Africa. They fear that the liberation movement, which has struggled for decades to win freedom for the South African people, will prove “immoderate” in the future. And they therefore state clearly that they will not apologize for serving “their own interests” in a distant land, even if “serving” them implies the “stability” of apartheid. 67. My delegation feels that the time has come to cut through the verbiage which has so frequently obscured the real issues in our deliberations over South Africa. We feel obliged to say that we can no longer take seriously or accept at face value the kinds of facile and even occasionally nonsensical theories of progress and change which we have heard from certain quarters for some time. We regard these arguments as a diversion and a trap. 68. I should like, then, to ask that the Council should take a further and important step in the direction of the goals I have outlined in this statement. With that understanding, the African members of the Council will submit two draft resolutions which are being prepared by the African Group. The first will, I believe, essentially recapitulate things which have been said before and condemn South Africa for the violence and repression which are becoming increasingly the norm in that tragic country. The second, however, will probably go much further. It will probably call upon all States to cease loans and investments to South Africa, to prevent corporations or institutions under their control from investing in or lending money to South Africa, to terminate investment and trade incentives now applicable to that country and, finally, to review their economic and other relations with South Africa. The African Group 70. Mr. HULINSK$! (Czechoslovakia) (irzterpretution from Russian): I should like first to express my particular satisfaction at the fact that you, Mr. President, the representative of an African country, are conducting the proceedings of the Security Council during the first month of 1978. As we see it, the questions connected with the total liberation of southern Africa will be kept under the constant consideration of the Council throughout the year. Czechoslovakia and Nigeria have identical positionq qn the question of the struggle against colonialism, racism and apartheid, as was confirmed once again during the highly successful visit to the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic in April last year by the Commissioner for External Affairs of Nigeria. In a joint communique published in that connexion, the following is stated: “On African affairs the Commissioner for External Affairs and his Czechoslovak counterpart reaffirmed their support for the peoples of Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa in their just struggle against colonialism, racism and apartheid. They condemned the racist policies being practised in southern Africa as an affront to the conscience of mankind and a defiance of the resolutions of the United Nations. Convinced that the liquidation of these evils in southern Africa would facilitate the relaxation of tension and the solution of conflicts in other parts of the world, they called on all peace-loving nations to act firmly in support of the oppressed peoples of southern Africa for the final liquidation of colonialist and neocolonialist policies of racism and apartheid.“’ 71. Speaking for the first time in the Security Council since Czechoslovakia became a member, I should like to join in the congratulations that have been expressed to the delegations of your country, Mr. President, and Gabon, Bolivia and Kuwait, which, together with us, have just begun their work here. In my turn, I should like to thank you for your words of welcome to my delegation. We should like also to thank the representatives of all the members of the Council who have congratulated our country on its assumption of its functions in the Council. Last, but by no means least, I would express my deep 1 Quoted in English by the speaker. 72. The Czechoslovak Socialist Republic has come to the Security Council fully determined to co-operate constructively with all its members towards the attainment of the goals of the United Nations as laid down in the Charter. 73. The fundamental policy of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic in the United Nations has always been and remains the wish to strive, along with all the other Members, to make the further deepening of the principles of coexistence between States having different social systems and the principles of comprehensive constructive and mutually advantageous co-operation an integral part of the daily work of all organs of the United Nations. In our view, what we have to do, with the assistance of the United Nations and the means available to it, is to work for the stabilization of the process of international detente which is already under way and to make that process universal, general and irreversible. 74. After only a short interval, the Security Council is once again compelled to take up the question of the policy of apartheid pursued by the racist regime at Pretoria. Such close attention to this question is to be explained by the fact that the situation in South Africa represents a direct threat to the security.of peoples. Not a single day goes by without world public opinion learning of tragic events in South Africa. In its desire to suppress internal resistance, the Pretoria regime is waging a veritable war against the oppressed population. The illegal apartkeid regime has raised the system of violence and,repression to the level of State policy-a policy that is being consolidated by further legislative, administrative and other measures based on racial discrimination. All these actions on the part of the South African racists and their acts of aggression against independent African States clearly indicate the determination of the apartheid regime at all costs to preserve its colonial domination over the indigenous African population. 75. An objective analysis of the current situation in South Africa compels the conclusion that the apartheid regime would have long ago ceased to exist, and that the source of constant danger in that part of the world would long ago have been removed if aII Member States had compiled with the decisions of the Organization and ceased to afford any support whatsoever to the South African racists. Preservation of the apartheid regime depends upon the constant influx of foreign capital and the comprehensive support afforded it, however overtly or covertly, by Western countries in their attempts to preserve tlieir own military strategic interests in that part of the world as well as the economic and financial interests of the transnational corporations. 76. The Organization has in its possession a great deal of evidence of this comprehensive co-operation and assistance. Permit me to mention merely the fact that, since 1960, the total amount of foreign capital investment in the South 77. In the struggle against apartheid, general condemnations have long proved inadequate. What are necessary are immediate and effective international measures that could bring about the early elimination of this inhuman policy. The adoption of urgent and effective measures against South Africa is necessary also because the South African Republic is the main obstacle to progress in the attainment of a just solution to the problem of the transfer of power to the African majority in Zimbabwe and Namibia. 78. The adoption of the mandatory arms embargo against South Africa was a definite step in this direction. However, the arms embargo against South Africa, which is in any case sufficiently well armed and able to produce nuclear weapons, cannot bring about the necessary results unless further effective measures are taken, measures designed totally to isolate the apartheid regime and to deprive it of any support whatsoever from outside. “The time has come for a total arms embargo against the racist rbgimes, a total embargo on all strategic materials which oil their war machines, and total economic sanctions. The Western Powers, which have fuelled the crisis by all their past pampering of the racist rigirnes, must be called upon to act, even at this late stage.“* 80. In conclusion, I should like to reassure those fighting against racism and apartheid that, in accordance with the principles of its socialist foreign policy, the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic will continue to afford them full political, material and moral assistance and support in their just struggle for freedom and independence. The meeting rose at 12.50 p.m. HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS Uniter1 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 Geneva. COMMENT SE PROCURER LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES Les publications des Nations Unies sont en vente dans les librairies et les agences depositaires du monde entier. Informez-vous aupr&s de votre libraire ou adressez-vous B : Nations Unies. Section des ventes, New York ou Gen&ve. MqqaHm Opranuaaqun 06zenaaeanblx HaqwR MOX~O IQTIWT~ a KI~WICHLIX Mara- JNH~X w areaTcTaax 80 Bcex pafioxax Mupa. Haao~ure cnpanxa 06 U3AaHAHX B BarneM KHUXHOM ieara3me mu nm.u~~e no aapecy : Opran~saqnn 06zenm4enHblx Ha&%, CeKuua no npofla>rte HJA&HNC~, HLM-MOPK wnu Xeneaa. COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas e&n en venta en librerfas y casas distribuidoras en todas partes de1 mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirfjase a: Naciones Unidas, Secci6n de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra. Litho in United Nations, New York Price: $U.S. 1.00 (or equivalent in other currencies) 7&700&j-December 19’